HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ar12@quads.uchicago.edu (Andre Robotewskyj)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: How dangerous are developer chemicals?
Date: 26 Jan 93 22:06:03 GMT
Reply-To: ar12@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago

High there- just a brief, non technical point of interest...
	Many photographers, including the late Ansel Adams, don't use
tongs or gloves in developing prints- not doing so enables one to
determine required stop bath time- ie: when the print loses that slimy,
alkaline feel and becomes "squeeky" its done- easy way to
compensate for stop bath neutralization with use- I know, no big deal...
From: bu890@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian Segal)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Color seps from print film
Date: 22 Jan 1993 04:56:15 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Whoops...what a lousy predicament!

Take heart, colour seps can be made from prints..they can be scanned
in to most colour seperation machines using drum scanning.

The real issue is quality as you are taking a second generation image to
press.  While many prionters will say it makes no difference, the
honest ones will tell you that transparencies are easier and cheaper
\to obtain good seps from.

Depending on the rigors of the reproduction quality demanded it should be
possible to get reasonable seps.

b
From: bstevens@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Bob Stevens)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Photographic Lens Flare Theory
Date: 27 Jan 93 21:47:48 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.ai.mit.edu

I'm trying to find out more about how the effect of a lens flare 
occurs.  In particular I'm curious as to what controls/causes the size 
of the various disks and circles of light, their color and color 
changes, the number of these and such.  I'm trying to create a computer 
program to replicate this effect accurately and I'd like it based on a 
real world model rather than my own "best guess".
 
Has anyone ever run across a paper or article on this?
 
Bob
From: monson@hobo.ECE.ORST.EDU (Ty Monson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: photography magazines
Date: 21 Jan 1993 20:14:44 GMT
Organization: ECE Dept.,OSU,Corvallis
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: hobo.ece.orst.edu
Keywords: subscription

In article <8826@news.duke.edu> laurap@neuro.duke.edu (Laura Poole) writes:
>Which (of the many) magazines devoted to photography are really worth getting
>a subscription to (or at least picking up from time to time)? I have a copy of
>Shutterbug, for instance, that I bought for mail order information, and I'm
>wondering if I should splurge for a subscription.
>
>Opinions anyone?

   It is easier to make recommendations after you have specified
   what you want in a magazine.
   Shutterbug is primarily advertising - good for people who
   want to stay on top of the used equipment market.

   American Photo has lots of examples of good photography.

   Professional Photographer is intended for people interested in
   commercial portraiture and wedding photography.

   Darkroom and Creative Camera Techniques is devoted to the "how to"
   of photographic imaging for people who are already quite familiar
   with the basics of photography.

   Photo District News is directed at keeping photographers abreast of
   what is happening in the business-end of photography.

   View Camera is for people interested in large format work.

   There are other magazines, of course. My descriptions above are 
   (perhaps) unfairly brief. But they will help you get started in 
   making your selections.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: picheny@watson.ibm.com (MA.Picheny;340090)
Subject: 1600 Speed Kodak Film
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:44:50 GMT
Reply-To: picheny@bellini.watson.ibm.com (MA.Picheny;340090)
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

I want to take pictures of my daughters indoor gym meet; I am afraid my
flash will not be good enough at long distances. Is this a good film for such
a purpose? I have an Elan.
From: cjk4800@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Ludwig van Halen Rocks RIoT)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Has any one tried Vericolor (III)?
Date: 28 Jan 93 03:42:30 GMT
Reply-To: cjk4800@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology

In article <C1J6o8.3yo@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, qili@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Kenneth Li) writes:
>I have a few questions about that film:
>
>1. Is it of any good?

It is pretty much the standard film for taking portraits.  It has a lower
contrast and better flesh tone rendering.

>
>2. Can Vericolor be processed as normal print films (Gold 100, for example)?
>
It is process C-41, like most other print films.  It is also printable like the
others, but I would look for a good lab to take it to because they are more
likely to have the VPS channel balanced.

>3. Is there any special requirement for stroing them (I will buy in bulk)?

I would keep them refrigerated untill you want to use them.  Let them warm to
room temp before removing them from the plastic cannister.  Process them
promptly.

>
>4. What are the alternatives to Vericolor that you would like to recommend?

Agfa makes Portra, which has similar characteristics.

>
>5. Finally, why do people use slides (they are expensive to buy, even more
>     expensive to print)?

Chromes have higher brightness ranges, better grain, better for presentation,
among other reasons.  It is also better for learning how to use a camera
because color print films will hide a lot of exposure mistakes where chromes
will not.  If you are interested in learning more about the camera, chrome may
be the way to go.  For the average guy, GoldPlus 200 is wonderful.
>
>Btw, I'm just a hobbyist, and take no more than 20 rolls a year.
>
>
>
The decision is really up to you.  I have a lot of great shots taken with
non-professional film and I have a lot of miserable shots taken with
professional film.  I would shoot some and see what you like initially, then
stick to it.  When you use one type of film, you get to know it's strengths and 
limitations and shoot accordingly.
>
>==========================================================================
>           Enjoy  Life!             | Internet:  qili@indiana.edu
>               --- Kenneth Li       |   Bitnet:  qili@indiana.bitnet

Hope that helps...

Chris...Lab Intern from Hell
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+Christopher J Kohanek          \\         CJK4800@RITVAX.isc.rit.edu 	      +
+Photo Systems Management        \\  164 R. Quigley Dr; Scottsville NY 14546  +
+Rochester Institute of Technology\\% Eastman Kodak, Rochester, NY 14650-1202 +
+        Disclaimer:  If my employers have opinions, it's news to me          +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: gsmlrn@gsm001.mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson)
Subject: Re: EEE on a Canon T90
Organization: Mendelson.com
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 03:11:51 GMT

>A friend of mine has a Canon T90 and her camera 
>recently started doing  a 'EEE' on the LCD screen
>and 'HELP' inside the viewfinder whenever she presses 
>the shutter release.  I replaced the batteries for her
>and took a look at a couple of other things, but I 
>couldn't figure out what the problem might be.  Does
>anyone out there who has/had a T90 know what might
>be going on?


This is one way to make a quick buck repairing T90's. The camera has a
LITHIUM battery under the top cover that's used to keep a small CMOS 
RAM chip that holds exposure number, etc. 

When the battery dies, the camera does this.

Since the top cover needs to be removed, expect to pay $30-$50 for it.

Do not pay for a new shutter, cpu, etc.

Geoff.
-- 
Geoffrey S. Mendelson 
(215) 242-8712
gsm@mendelson.com     or uunet!gsm001!gsm
From: titan@carina.unm.edu ()
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Avoid FOTO CELL!  Avoid FOTO CELL!  Avoid FOTO CELL!
Date: 26 Jan 1993 03:59:33 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: carina.unm.edu

In article <1993Jan25.160423.2565@ucbeh.san.uc.edu> yuanj@ucbeh.san.uc.edu writes:
>Do not order any thing from FOTO CELL of NYC!

yep. stick with B&H and Adorama, and even then, hold your breath....

>What can I do?

some of these i have done. some of these i haven't. i have applied none
to those notorious NY camera suppliers:

1) file mail fruad charges. this is a slow, laborious process, but sooner
or later the offender gets a note in the mail from the postal inspector
general's office asking what the h*ll is going on. this tends to get results.
doesn't necessarily get any satisfaction, per se.

2) write your $75 off as "educational expenses", cut up your discover card
(telling them why), and only do business with those that take american
express, which has a demonstrably better reputation for beating up slimy
vendors who goof over the paying customer (the one time i needed their
help, it was instantly forthcoming, and friends have had similar good
experiences).

3) sue them in small claims, in your local jurisdiction, and have them
served, after judgement, in their jurisdiction (assuming you can get away
with this; some places yes, others no). demand $75 plus all expenses (phone
calls, legal fees, wasted shipping, etc). this should come to many hundreds
of dollars, and you will almost certainly win :-).

4) write the NY state corporation commission, allege mail fraud, and demand
that any licenses be revoked.

5) write the NY municipal chamber of commerce, with the same purpose as #4
above.

6) write the NY municipal better business bureau, with the same purpose
as #4 above.

7) forget the whole thing (and be thankful it was only $75, not $7500).

somehwhat tonge-in-cheek, for which i apologize. in summary, there is
probably not much you can do at this point that will get you anywhere.

						mike
						titan@carina.unm.edu
From: kbb0@harvey.gte.com (Kevin Burke)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Lecia abbrevation
Date: 28 Jan 93 22:40:37 GMT

In article <mjerosc-280193100052@mslmac.erenj.com>, mjerosc@erenj.com (Michael Jerosch-Herold) writes:
> In article <12430098@hpmwnpd2.sr.hp.com>, allana@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Allan
> Armstrong) wrote:
> > 
> > A related question about Leica: my enlarger and lens are both marked
> > with the inscription "E. Leitz-Wetzlar." I am told that this means that
> > it is a Leica enlarger and lens. Why doesn't it just say "Leica?"
> > 
> > Allan
> 
> I assume that this is the case because the company name was really
> Ernst Leitz and was located in Wetzlar. Leica is just a tradename?

Comes from:
			LEItz CAmera -> LEICA

- Kevin
Organization: Penn State - Erie
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 12:15:04 EST
From: Ron McCarty <RON@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Using motor drives with Bronica ETRS

I have always wanted to get a motor drive for my ETRS (whish is about
15 years old but works great). I have heard of problems with motor
drives on ETRS though, that the motor drive had to be matched to the
camera (not just the model but the camera itslef). Does anyone
have experience with them? My main interest in having a motor drive
is so that I can take pictures by remote control (set my camera up
at my bird feeder for example and trigger it from inside the house etc)
Any suggestions on ways to do this with an ETRS would be appreciated.

Ron McCarty
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au
Subject: Re: renewing silica gel
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 15:01:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.002419.17045@cello.hpl.hp.com>, jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson) writes:
> 
> I've come into possesion a quite large packet of silica gel, perhaps 6
> to 8 ounces, that once kept moisture out of an HP X-terminal during
> shipment.  I would like to use this for keeping my photo equipment
> dry, especially now that California has gotten confused with Seattle.
> (Ie its been raining for a several weeks straight.)  I understand that
> I can re-activitate the silica gel by putting it in the oven at x
> degrees for y hours.  What are the accepted values of x and y?
> 
>   -- David Jacobson

150C for 8hr according to the Fisher Catalogue.

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Re: Plastic Canon
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:06:38 GMT

In article <nicholson.11@main.mndly.umn.edu>, nicholson@main.mndly.umn.edu (JOHN JAY NICHOLSON) writes:
> 
> Why are most Canon cameras made of mostly plastic?  You pick up the Elan or 
> the new A2E, and they feel so cheap?  I understand that the EOS 1 is a very 
> well made camera, and is very durable, but all the others that I have seen 
> are almost pure plastic.  If you don't believe me, open the back of the A2E 
> and look.

Well, they are light, durable and probably cheaper to produce. Whether or
not they will last as long as traditional all metal bodies remains to be
seen. I have heard reports that they survive drops as well as or better
than metal bodies. Remember that crash helmets are made of "plastic" not
metal and they certainly seem to hold up. Not all "plastic" is fragile
and brittle. On the other hand they do feel "cheap" when compared to an
all metal camera. Their lightness probably adds to this feeling too. Maybe
it is just a "feeling" though.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: fedrick@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Kelvin W. Fedrick)
Subject: Re: Tmax problem...
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 05:34:53 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.002335.29684@ida.liu.se> d88micla@odalix.ida.liu.se (Michael Larsson) writes:

>Kodak uses a red dye layer on the T-max to increase sensibility, I believe.
                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^
Seems like a sensible thing to do to me ... or should I say a 'sensitive'
thing to do. :)

>However it requires extended fixing, at least double the usual time to
>resolve this layer. Alternatively, use Kodaks special fix for this.
 ^^^^^^^

 Well that resolves that question ... or should I say 'disolves' that
 question.  :)

>                        Michael Larsson, Linkoeping University, Sweden

I'm guessing from you signature that english is a second language for you,
so I hope realize that this was meant as just a little light hearted humor.

-kelvin
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: malu@imhps.im.se (Mats Luthman SYSTECON)
Subject: TMAX 3200 fogged, what did go wrong?
Organization: Industri-Matematik Data AB, Sweden
Distribution: rec
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:12:38 GMT


I developed a roll of Tmax 3200 for the first time, and it came out fogged.

I can see four possible reasons for this:

1. The file was fogged because of the way it was handled before I got it.
   I purchaesed it a few weeks ago, and has since kept it in my fridge.
   Expiration month was this month.

2. It was fogged because of the way I handled it. I didn't expose the film
   can to more than ordinary room light. I loaded the developing tank
   in my bathroom where I could barely see light in the door chinks after
   half a minute in the dark, but I did everything under a towel. The whole
   film is evenly fogged so this alternative seems unlikely.

3. I messed up when I developed it. I did exactly what I use to do when
   developing Tmax 100 (but developed for 9.5 minutes +-3 seconds) in Tmax
   developer, when I always have got consistent results. So this alternative
   doesn't seem likely either.

4. It is supposed to be like this. The fogg is definitely there, with
   clear grain structure all the way to the edge of the film, and the
   same over the whole film. I didn't notice it at first, but when I
   make a contact copy of a frame with an unexposed piece of the
   fogged (developed) film covering it, I need 300% more light (2
   f-stops).  When I try this with a piece of unexposed Tmax 100 I
   need 50% more light. Even if you push a film this far I can't see
   a technical reason why you should not be able to clear the film
   where it is not exposed, so I don't think this is a likely cause
   either.


To me, the most likely cause seems to be number 1, the film has aged to
fast. Does this happen, or did I do something wrong?



--
Mats Luthman
Systecon AB (A subsidiary of Industri-Matematik AB)
Stockholm, Sweden
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin)
Subject: Re: F3 F2A Price ?
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 07:42:52 GMT

In article <C1AHsA.D7v@ns1.nodak.edu> kfho@plains (Vampire ) writes:

   Does anyone know the current price for the Nikon F2A white body, MD-12.?    
   the body is start 80???????? 

I've seen F2A's in decent shape in the $300 range but prices vary
widely.  They are GREAT cameras.  Note the MD12 is not for F2's,
it's for the more recent amateur-oriented Nikons (FM, FE, etc.).
From: rika@informix.com (Rika Tsitsinia)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Plastic Canon
Date: 22 Jan 93 05:44:50 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <1993Jan22.002517.29853@news.weeg.uiowa.edu> goldis@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Al Goldis) writes:
>I'm really surprised by how many people complain about "plastic"
>cameras feeling cheap and flimsy.  Personally, I don't think having
>a camera weigh less is a disadvantage.  I suppose if it would make
>people feel better they could always put some lead weights inside.  :-)
>
>"Plastic" cameras are not made of the same kind of plastic you find in
>a tub of butter or a cheap icecube tray.  It's not going to shatter if
>you drop it.  In this era of space-age materials why is it so hard to
>believe that things don't have to weigh a ton to be strong?
>

	I believe my Minolta Maxxum 7000 was also made of some
    space-age wonder plastic. Well, it broke when it fell from
    about 10 inches onto the pavement. I was amazed, stunned!
    And it was inside a thinly padded bag, to boot!

	At the shop they told me it would take $80 just to touch
    it. Oh, the wonders of complicated electronic cameras! So I
    left it unrepaired, since it was the battery cover that was
    dislocated and cracked while the rest seemed to be still
    light-proof. I sold it and made one decision:

    	Never buy a plastic camera again!

>I wouldn't think that models intended for average consumers would be
>as durable as the top-of-the-line professional model (nor are they as
>expensive), but despite all the complaints about how cheap and flimsy
>plastic cameras feel, I've never heard of a single legitimate
>durability problem.
>
	Mine is legitimate IMO. And there is no reason that a camera
    chock-full with electronic chips and motors have a cheap and
    non-durable outer shell to protect them. No reason at all.
    They are not cheap anyway, and a little better protection
    would not add to the cost all that much. Sorry, I don't buy
    this argument.

	And *I* want to be the one who decides how long my camera
    should last and when I should replace it. And I still gladly
    have the option, although the way they replace metal with plastic
    I am afraid I won't in the future.

	And BTW, metal need not be all that heavy.

>One other thing.  Pros I know used to really moan and groan about the
>plastic lens hoods that most EOS lenses come with.  Now they realize
>they actually protect better than metal because they absorb the impact
>instead of merely transmitting it to the lens.

	No experience with metal v plastic hoods. I have both and
    I don't think one is better than the other. If what you say is
    right, then hoods is a good application for plastic. But camera
    bodies, in my experience, is not! At least not yet.
    

>--
>Al Goldis     

	Georgios
From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Plastic Canon
Date: 25 Jan 93 22:34:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24706
Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ

In article <1993Jan25.174809.9385@adobe.com> asanders@adobe.com (Alan Sanders) writes:

> Well, an 8008(s) is certainly no match for the F4s, but everything
> is relative (as they say).

Interestingly, to my hands the 8008s feels like a toy compared to the N90.
Compared to both, the F4 feels like a brick.  Sometimes that's good;
it depends on whether you like carrying bricks around.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: 1600 Speed Kodak Film
From: fred-mckenzie@ksc.nasa.gov (Fred McKenzie)
Date: 25 Jan 93 17:30:20 EST
Followup-To: rec.photo
Distribution: world
Organization: NASA/Kennedy Space Center, Florida

In article <1993Jan25.194450.3062@watson.ibm.com>, picheny@watson.ibm.com
(MA.Picheny;340090) wrote:
> I want to take pictures of my daughters indoor gym meet; I am afraid my
> flash will not be good enough at long distances. Is this a good film for such
> a purpose? I have an Elan.


I've been very happy with Kodacolor Gold 1600.  It does have a little more
grain than Gold 400, but not much.

I've heard there is a Kodak EktaPress 1600.  You may ask about it at a good
Pro photo store.  EktaPress may be better than Kodacolor, from reports I've
read.

There is also a Konica ISO 3200 color-negative film.  I have tried a couple
of rolls.  The speed rating is probably accurate, but grain is much more
noticeable than with the Kodak films.  It may have been the printer setup,
but I didn't think the color was quite as good as with Kodak.

Something to consider - you may be asking too much of your film to
compensate for a weak flash.  Is it one of those low power built-in
flashes?  If so, I suggest you try to photograph a similar event in advance
of your daughter's gym meet.  You can use these "test" pictures to decide
if you need more horse-power, both in the flash and in the lens you plan to
use.

fred-mckenzie@ksc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: rec.photo