HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Paper Exposure Times, etc.
Date: 6 Apr 92 21:34:34 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1074@bartal.BARTAL.COM> phillip@BARTAL.COM (Phillip M. Vogel) write
>.>
>.>The time is inversely proportional to brightness, and thus is
>.>proportional to
>.>
>.>Si^2 f^2
>.>--------
>.>   F^2
>
>Well I hate to throw a wrench into  all this terribly impressive
>math, but I'd just like to add two words:
>                  RECIPROCITY FAILURE
>In other words, (to get back to the original question of whether
>ther's a way to calculate exposure times for BIG enlargements),
>all the math may get you close, but there's no way around doing
>test strips (I think).


  Instead of throwing a wrench, why don't you throw some light into
the matter and tell us something about the reciprocity failure
characteristics of the most popular paper types.  I've heard a lot
concerning reciprocity failure of films but nothing concerning papers.
I mostly use Kodak Polycontrast III and Kodak Ektacolor Plus papers.  


  I don't think test strips are a better solution, unless you do all
your enlargements at just a few magnification settings.  I love
printing because it allows me to select out a part of the negative to
enlarge, so I can't afford to make a test strip for almost every
print.
From: j_feldman@blkice.enet.dec.com ( )
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: photog. in Nat'l/State Parks etc.
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:35:55 GMT
Reply-To: j_feldman@blkice.enet.dec.com ( )
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <1992Apr8.182940.3139@odin.corp.sgi.com>, michelle@play.esd.sgi.com (Michelle Boyd) writes:

|>I read something recently which made me wonder
|>about selling photos I have taken in National /
|>State Parks, Recreation areas, Beaches, and
|>Wildlife refuges/preserves.  I assumed that
|>since I was a US citizen, these areas belonged
|>to me as long as I wasn't doing anything to destroy
|>them.  Do I need special permission or releases
|>to sell photos taken in these areas?

A friend of mine came back from Yellowstone and mentioned that if you "look"
like a professional photographer, you will be asked if you are one, and if you
say yes, you'll be required to purchase a "permit" (he shoots a 4x5 wood
field).  Evidently congress has reasoned that since you are profiting from the
parks you should pay extra (like ranchers, miners and loggers).  My contention
is that a photograper's impact is no more than any other tourist (I would hope
neater), unlike virtually any other leased use.  I don't know how far this has
gone beyond National Parks.  I doubt there are "picture police" scanning every
art gallery and published document and comparing the names against a list of
who bought permits.;'{)} but you never know...

Don't bother flaming me about how one looks like a pro photographer...I almost
hurt myself laughing when he first told me.  I can see it now...right after the
bear managment course, they teach the aspiring rangers how to "spot" a Zone
system user and how to differentiate between Nikon models. ;'{)}

jimf

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: fculpepp@norfolk.vak12ed.edu (Fred W. Culpepper)
Subject: Re: B&W Contact Prints
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 92 19:22:22 GMT

You have received many good suggestions which refer to a
contact "frame".  To get a good idea of what is being
discussed, go to the public library and find the oldest book on
photography that is still on the shelves.  Look up SUN FRAME.
There you will find a picture or drawing of the device that
will work with modern print (enlarging) pager and a small (25w)
lamp.

-- 
Fred W. Culpepper, ODU

fculpepp@norfolk.vak12ed.edu
From: mvolo@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Michael R. Volow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Besseler enlarger,
Keywords: Besseler B22, Rodenstock.
Date: 5 Apr 92 19:39:02 GMT
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service


First of all, the B22XL is an Omega, not a Besseler. I have one; it
remains a sturdy, well designed enlarger. In good condition, it 
cshould cost about $150-180 without lenses, but with one or two negative
carriers. If you are going to use it for 35mm, make sure it has the
supplementary condenser.

Which models of Rodenstock lenses are these.

$150 is a good price assuming you have all of the bits and pieces you
need to operate it.

However, if you even anticipate doing color work, don't buy the B22.
It's interchangeable color head is not made any more, is hard to find,
and is costly ($200) when you do find one.

I upgraded my B22XL to color because I already had carriers, lenses, and
lens boards. If I had no existing enlarger, I would have bought a secongd
hand Omega 760XL dicho enlarger or other dichro head enlarger. Sometimes
the reason second hand condenser enlargers are cheap is the costliness
of upgrading to color head.

If you do decide to get the B22XL, one good source for bits and pieces of
out of manufacture Omega enlargers is Harry Taylor at Classic Enlargers
203 329 9228.

-- 
Michael Volow, Psychiatry, Durham VA Med Center, Durham NC 27712
919 286 0411 Ext 6933               mvolo@ecsvax.edu
From: monson@caviar.ECE.ORST.EDU (Tyrus Monson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: photog. in Nat'l/State Parks etc.
Date: 9 Apr 92 19:18:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: talon.1992Apr9.191828.6301
Organization: Oregon State University, Corvallis

In article <1992Apr8.182940.3139@odin.corp.sgi.com> michelle@play.esd.sgi.com (Michelle Boyd) writes:
>
>I read something recently which made me wonder
>about selling photos I have taken in National /
>State Parks, Recreation areas, Beaches, and
>Wildlife refuges/preserves.  I assumed that
>since I was a US citizen, these areas belonged
>to me as long as I wasn't doing anything to destroy
>them.  Do I need special permission or releases
>to sell photos taken in these areas?
>
>michelle

  Generally, you do not need special permission to take and use photos
  (though in recent history, some park rangers were abusing their
   authority on the matter.)
  Public access to certain areas of parks and (especially) wildlife refuges
  are restricted. Your photographic activity will be accordingly restricted.
  Photography, or any other activity, which is destructive to sensitive
  habitat is going to be restricted. If your photographic activity
  interferes with normal park activities (eg. you tell visitors to get
  out of the way because YOU are a photographer) you will get in trouble.
  And you might as well check with the authorities BEFORE you start 
  erecting a scaffold to get a better view.
  In simpler terms - use good judgement.
  But the photos you take are yours use as you see fit.
From: jimc@isc-br.ISC-BR.COM (Jim Cathey)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: B&H: Please help!
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:46:01 GMT
Organization: ISC-Bunker Ramo, An Olivetti Company

In article <74040@netnews.upenn.edu> liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang) writes:
>  Ok, this is the real reason I made this post.  A lot of people here
>seem to think that CWO is soooo much better than those slimy NYC places.
>I've visited B&H, Adorama, and CWO (my parents live near Portland),
>and I find no reason to believe CWO is any better.  The salesmen at
>CWO are all a bit uptight.  They become very defensive when you bring
>up the fact that their mail order prices are so much lower than their
>in-store prices.

I've been to CWO, and they state that the mail-order business has the
same owners, but is otherwise a separate company.  True or not, I don't
know.  I do know that I was unable to return in person an item I had
bought by mail-order.

>...So please don't give us any more whining about how rude NYC salesmen
>are, and how west coast people are all a bunch of little angels.

They've always been nice enough to me, they speak English well, too.
I've never had an order hung up forever there, and 'in-stock' seems to
mean the same thing to them as it does to me.  They do move a _lot_ of
equipment through that shop.  They don't always have the absolute best
price (though sometimes they do), but being almost hassle-free, often
with 2-3 day delivery (to this location one state away) makes them my
first choice.  B&H is my second.

+----------------+
! 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"
From: yoshi@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (D M Yoshikami)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Help w/Push Processing
Date: 10 Apr 92 12:25:03 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: National Naval Medical Center

In article <1992Apr1.194845.8005@cmcl2.nyu.edu> ramnarain@mcclb0.med.nyu.edu (Satya Ramnarain) writes:
>I would appreciate any help on push processing. I'm new to developing my
>film and prints and I know nothing about pushing
>
>info: I'll be using Tri-X film to photomicrograph fluorescently stained 
>objects, as such the light level is extremely low therefore I want to push
>to 800 or more. The film was recomended by Kodak, and a co-worker who also
>used it for this application but forgot all the pertinent info.
> 
>			What I need to know is Developer (HC-110, Dektol, Edwal,...?);
>   Dilution; Development times; Agitation; Fix; and whatever else
>   is important. 

You can always try giving Kodak another call and asking them about developing.
They might [just might] have some datasheets or other information for a nominal
charge (a dollar or so?) that might help.  If you KNOW how much light is 
coming off your sample, you can guess what the negative densities could be
from the film's characteristic curves [don't forget to compensate for losses
through the lens opening].  These you can get from Kodak themselves
(probably for another nominal charge) or from the Photo-lab Index from 
Morgan & Morgan (the book is $60.00 nowdays).   

Another trick that might (and I do say might) be worth trying is to pre-expose
the film slightly  (Ansel Adams talks about this in depth) so that you are no
longer at the toe of the H&D curve, thus making the real dark subjects a bit
more visible.  (this doesn't do much to bright objects.)

The trickiest part (and this may take some experimenting) is exposure and
development -- fixing will be the same as for everything else.  Experiment a
couple times, as that's the only way you'll know if you're getting what you 
want.

DY :-)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
D M Yoshikami  :-) ;-) :-) | Internet: yoshikami@usuhsb.ucc.usuhs.nnmc.navy.mil
May the Forth be with you! | Bitnet  : yoshikami@usuhsb.bitnet
***  !!xob X*NU V METSYS T&TA eht ni renosirp dleh gnieb m`I  !pleH  !pleH  ***
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: bear@harlqn.co.uk (Andy Edwards)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Replacing focussing screens in an OM40
Date: 15 Apr 92 17:47:32 GMT
Distribution: rec.photo
Organization: Harlequin Limited, Cambridge, England


Hi!

I have a question for all you OM owners (no flames! only experience &
useful comments requested in response, please):

I have an OM40 and I wish to change the split line focussing screen
for a matte field one.

Reason: I've bought myself a 400mm Tokina lens & focussing is really
hard with the split line close to infinity.  Unfortunately the Tokina
booklet suggests fitting a matte field screen.

I telephoned a local camera shop expert and he said that the
OM10,20,30,40 range have fixed screens in the manufacturing process
(ie they can never be changed).

Now we all know that sometimes assistants in camera shops have been
trained with the *gifted knowledge* & sales expertise, "no, but I can
sell you a camera that will have/do what you want...".

Is this true?

He did say the OM1,2,3,4 range have interchangeable screens, but they
cost a fortune (even second hand). I know the OM4ti is the latest in
the range (albeit a good many years old now & past it with all this
auto focus crap) with spot/program metering etc and more fancy widgets
than the OM40.

If I can't change the screen on the OM40, does any of you OM4ti's
owners know if this camera is good for sport photography (especially
with big lenses)? Are there any disadvantages with the metering
system? General hints & tips?

Oh, I'll telephone the Olympus servicing department tomorrow as back
up advice, and post any useful information I collect.

Reply by news or e-mail. Thanks in advance.

+--: Andy Edwards :----------*=================*------------------------------+
| Macintosh fire fighter,    | Harlequin Ltd.  |      uucp: bear@harlqn.uucp  |
| deity, PostScript language | Barrington Hall |     janet: bear@uk.co.harlqn |
| level 2 porter and PAP     | Barrington      | applelink: harlequin         |
| server clone originator.   | Cambridge       |     voice: 0223 872522       |
|   *Life is strange, yeah   | CB2 5RG         |            +44-223-872-522   |
|     compared to what?*     | England         |       fax: 0223 872519       |
+----------------------------*=================*------------------------------+
From: cnmne@plex-1 (Chris Ellinger)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: mechanical cameras
Date: 10 Apr 92 12:18:16 GMT
Organization: Plex-1, Michigan's Public Access Usenet Gateway  (Ann Arbor).

In article <6455@shodha.enet.dec.com> j_feldman@blkice.enet.dec.com ( ) writes:
>In article <DAVIDD.92Apr6135508@felix.noaapmel.gov>, davidd@noaapmel.gov (David Doll) writes:
>|>
>|>Hello, I'm new to this newsgroup so if anyone could tell me where/if theres a
>|>FAQ, I'd appreciate it. Second, I've been out/away from photography for about
>|>15 years or so and I'm now just starting to get back into things. I used to 
>|>use a Olympus OM1 for hiking/climbing; it worked great in the cold weather, 
>|>light, etc. I've been told they aren't made anymore. Q1: does anyone know of
>|>anybody (stores, etc) that still sell them? Q2: what's the state of machanical
>|>cameras now-a-days. Any thing I should look out for or avoid. Thanks much for 
>|>the help and info.
>
>a1.  Check shutterbug (available at larger newstands), you should have NO
>trouble finding old OM1's in excellent or better condition.  Del's comes to
>mind as does KEH.  With 50mm lens, shouldn't be more than $160.  Probably some
>old Nikons out there too, but I'm not sure what models have mechanical
>shutters.  Del's is a Nikon dealer and I would expect they could tell you.
>
>B2.  I'm sure someone will correct me, but I think the only all mechancial
>(except the meter) 35mm SLR camera left in production, is the Pentax K1000.
>

The Nikon FM-2n is another all-mechanical camera that is still available.

It isn't as small as the Olympus, but is not too large.  I've been using
one for five years and have found it to be very reliable.

Chris Ellinger
Ann Arbor, MI
From: bear@harlqn.co.uk (Andy Edwards)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: immaturity on rec.photo
Date: 15 Apr 92 10:37:29 GMT
Organization: Harlequin Limited, Cambridge, England


In article <1992Apr6.183337.27458@noao.edu> Carl Madson writes:

*>Gentlemen,
*> ...[ double click here to expand text ]...
*
*I HAVE been following the thread, since much of the topic is important to 
*serious imaging professionals and users, but my vote's still with Dyer on
*keeping the crap out of rec.photo. It's a potentially useful thread, but

I agree, photographic hand books usually describe in detail
photographers copyrights -- can this stuff be directed to
alt.binaries.pictures.whatevercrap (after all we won't catch their
attention & stop them from infringing copyright(s)) or alt.copyright
where this stuff really belongs.

*personal flames don't belong here.
*
*
*		--Carl Madson, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA

Immaturity belongs elsewhere.

+--: Andy Edwards :----------*=================*------------------------------+
| Macintosh fire fighter,    | Harlequin Ltd.  |      uucp: bear@harlqn.uucp  |
| deity, PostScript language | Barrington Hall |     janet: bear@uk.co.harlqn |
| level 2 porter and PAP     | Barrington      | applelink: harlequin         |
| server clone originator.   | Cambridge       |     voice: 0223 872522       |
|   *Life is strange, yeah   | CB2 5RG         |            +44-223-872-522   |
|     compared to what?*     | England         |       fax: 0223 872519       |
+----------------------------*=================*------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: Flash meters?
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 16:26:56 GMT

In article <BEATLE.92Apr15074708@sentry.larc.nasa.gov> beatle@sentry.larc.nasa.gov (Teresa Nicholls) writes:
>
>Speaking of flash meters and any meter, does anyone have any 
recommendations >for one? I have seen a friend's Minolta Spot V 
I believe, wonderful - measures >flash and spot, is there any others 
that are just as good?
>
>Teresa
>
Like anything else, we all have are preferences.  I will
probably always be a CANON F1 person and will always be a
Minolta Flash "F" diehard. I have been using the Minolta
Spotmeter F (reads one degree) unit for about three years now 
and it has never failed to give the correct readings in either Flash 
or reflected measurements.  The reason I prefer the "F" meter
is that I can be at my camera and "aim" at the subject and press
the button to obtain my reading(s). Minolta just came out with
a new version of the Minolta V, the Minolta V F (?).  It costs
less than the "V" and I am thinking about trying it out.  I
also have a Minolta III for ambient readings.  I use this meter
for macro photography of flowers.  Again, a great meter for my
purposes.
-- 
        ********     John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	********	
 "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."
										- Henry David Thoreau
From: rslugg@med.unc.edu (Robert Slugg)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: FA really better than FE2?
Date: 8 Apr 92 03:15:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: samba.1992Apr8.031503.22195
Distribution: usa,local
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine

I like the FE@ more than the FA because of the viewfinder, pretty much
everything I need to know is there, and I don't have to search through
clutter to find it.  The LCD display is about as useful as the LCD counter
on my first panasonic VCR.

Bob Slugg
From: do@acsu.buffalo.edu (Huy T. Do)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Is there any flash comparable to Canon 430EZ
Date: 7 Apr 92 15:31:55 GMT
Organization: UB

I have a EOS 630, my old flash is broken so I'm planning to buy a new
flash.  Is there any independent-make flash comparable to 430EZ, 
especially with its rear-curtain-blade feature ?

Thanks vey much.


 

-- 
Huy T. Do      **   University of New York at Buffalo   *   Fax: (716) 836-0965
v055reem@ubvms.bitnet     *      do@cs.buffalo.edu      *      CIS : 71477,1356
----   "Imagination is more important than knowledge."   --  Albert Einstein --
From: mvolo@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Michael R. Volow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: RA4 vs EP2 printing differences?
Keywords: RA$ EP2 color printing
Date: 17 Apr 92 03:14:16 GMT
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service


Could someone please summarize the differences between the RA4
color printing process and the EP2 process. I am familiar with the
EP2 process and the corresponding Ektacolor paper.

What are the differences between the papers themselves?

Is the EP2 process being phased out?

Thanks in advance.
-- 
Michael Volow, Psychiatry, Durham VA Med Center, Durham NC 27712
919 286 0411 Ext 6933               mvolo@ecsvax.edu
Xref: sparky rec.photo:7064 can.general:2150 misc.legal:9243
From: strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,can.general,misc.legal
Subject: Re: What is required to sell pictures?
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:59:53 GMT
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA

In article <1992Apr07.144944.17626@bmerh2.bnr.ca> lavoie@bnr.ca (Marc Lavoie) writes:

}As far as I know, if there are people in your photos, you must have
}them sign a release form stating clearly what the picture will be used
}for.  For example, "can be used in a photo contest", "can be sold",
}"I give up any rights to the picture", "can be sold but xx% must be paid
}to the subject"...
}
}The only case where this does not apply is for pictures where people are
}not recognizable (too fuzzy, too far...) or if the pictures were taken
}at an open event, demonstration... as long as people just happen to be there
}(in other words, I don't think you can click pictures of one person all day).
}This is the exception that allows television station to broadcast footage
}of events without getting a release from everybody.

A contract in which one party gives something to the other, and receives
absolutely nothing of value in return, is not enforceable in the courts.
For that reason, a release should always specify that the rights given
to the photographer are in return for some "valuable consideration",
usually $1.  

Never make the mistake of asking a subject to sign a release for nothing
at all.  If it goes to court, the court will fix a value, usually much
greater than you would have paid in the first instance!  

-- 

Norm Strong  (strong@tc.fluke.com)
2528 31st S.   Seattle WA 98144   USA
From: cmiller@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Catherine Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Mail order info
Date: 8 Apr 92 12:18:43 GMT
Reply-To: cmiller@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Catherine Miller)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Annapolis, MD


    I keep reading a about a review of mail order stores.  Where
can I find it?  I am about to enter the world of mail order by
purchasing a Canon EOS 100-300 ultrasonic lens.  I would prefer
not to be ripped-off too badly.
    Thanks.

__________

     "Only the mediocre are always at their best."
		   Stuart (Not A Liscensed Therapist) Smalley
__________
From: andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino)
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1992 17:30:09 GMT
Subject: Re: Nikon FA, FE2, FE feature summary request
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

grant@eecg.toronto.edu (Grant Goodes) writes:
> 
> The FE is a very
> good camera, and the only reason I traded up was that the FE was so
> much the ideal camera for me that the FE2 (being very similar plus
> some improvements) looked like the 35mm camera for the rest of my life.

Yup, to be moderately cynical about this, I've often wondered if this isn't
why Nikon discontinued them. I'd still buy two new FE2's at the drop of 
the hat (at a reasonable price, that is), but have been uninterested in 
the N8008, etc. as it is, I may have to purchase an F4 for the mirror
lock-up. (You all will have to pardon my character flaw that causes me to buy
only new equipment unless the savings are overwhelming. :-) )

> And I must say, I have not been tempted (not even by the F4 or sexy
> Leicas) to `upgrade' again.

I wonder if there's just a few of us stick-in-the-muds, or if Nikon (et al)
are failing to service a LARGE number of customers.


    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
    % Andy Cassino                                       %
    % Hewlett-Packard - Lake Stevens Instrument Division %
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From: Herberg_David@tandem.com (David Herberg)
Subject: Re: 4 x 5 camera help
Organization: Tandem Computers, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 21:45:43 GMT


I went backpacking with my first 4x5, a monorail Toyo 45A studio camera 
with wonderful movements and extension.  This first trip, the tripod fell 
over and the rear standard broke.  Focusing is left as an exercise for the 
student.  The second trip, the ground glass broke while the camera was 
still in the pack.  Focusing is left as an exercise for the graduate 
student.

I now have the Toyo 45A field camera.  Now complete with honorable scars, 
it has survived many an excursion.  The roughest was a 60 mph ride 
bouncing in a "trailer" behind a snowmobile all day in Yellowstone.  Most 
of the scars came from that trip.  The movements of the 45A are more 
restricted than the 45A (you figure it out), but the repair bills are less.

David Herberg, Herberg_David@tandem.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo