HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: milt@sdd.hp.com (Milt Fisher)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: To buy Nikon lens in Hong Kong and Singapore (edited)
Date: 27 Aug 1992 14:31:04 -0700
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdl105.sdd.hp.com


Also, in the same vein, does anyone know anything about purchasing camera
equipment in duty free ports, such as St. Thomas, USVI?  How do the prices
compare to mail order?

-- 

Milt Fisher - Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
milt@sdd.hp.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: markt@cup.hp.com (Mark Thompson)
Subject: Re: selenium wash
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:11:48 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1scd1 PL4

One other toner to check into is Polytoner.  You can vary the diluetion
to get anything from the warm browns to that more subtle selenium.  It contains
selenium so it also gives you some inporviment in longivity.  
IMO the whole process smooth long warm tone prints starts with the print 
developer (assuming a good neg. of course).  I like portriga in selectol
or dektol 1-1.  


Mark Thompson
From: edmtl@alf.uib.no (Thor Legvold)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Use Velvia at 32 or 40? (Was: Re: Fuji Slide Film or Pushing Kodachr)
Date: 1 Sep 92 14:23:25 GMT
Organization: University of Bergen, Norway

In article <1992Aug31.222012.12334@truevision.com> frank@truevision.com (Frank Loffel) writes:
>robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson) writes:
>
>[stuff deleted]
>
>>stability than Ektachrome. I also use Fujichrome Velvia (at EI 32 or 40)
>>when I want extra color (NOT for images of people).
>
>In what cases would you use Velvia at ISO 40? At ISO 32?

ISO 40 - when I want 'correct' exposure (50 seems to be just a little bit
underexposed, but I prefer the 'look' at 50.  Not everyone does.)

ISO 32 - when you want a slight overexposure (lower contrast, bleached out
colours)

Don't use Velvia for portraits....

>
>Any specific rules or just gut feeling?

It's up to you.  Maybe you should try a few rolls and see what you like best.

>And do you shoot for projection or for reproduction?

I shoot for both.  And ASA 50 works just fine for both (for me anyway :-)
>
>
>-- 
>-- Frank Loffel, Truevision, Inc., uunet!epicb!frank frank@truevision.com :-) --


Regards,
Thor
From: sog@craycos.com (Steve Gombosi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photo chemicals and septic system??
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:16:04 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

In article <263@metran.UUCP> jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
>feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman) writes:
>: In article <1992Sep2.130454.24574@ncsu.edu>, bloomfld@stat.ncsu.edu (Peter Bloomfield) writes:
>: |>The subject line says it all: I'm considering moving to a house with a
>: |>septic system.  Will photo chemicals kill the critters?  If so, what's
>: |>the recommended way to get rid of them (yes, the chemicals)?
>: |>
>: Call the Kodak 800 number  and ask for the pamphlet on disposal of photo
>: chemicals.  There is one specific to getting rid of small volumes, but I can't
>: remember the name.  It will explain all.
>
>Just to make things a little easier, you might try specifying Kodak
>Publication J-20, Disposing of Minilab Effluent.  There is also Publication
>J-55, Disposal and Treatment of Photographic Effluent -- In Support of Clean
>Water, but they will probably want you to pay ($8) for that.

How about Publication J-52, "Disposal of Small Volumes of Photographic
Processing Solutions"? I think that's probably what he's looking for.


Steve
From: merkel@convex.com (Kent Merkel)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Photo flea Markets
Date: 28 Aug 92 17:19:24 GMT
Distribution: dfw
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

Does anyone know of a consumer oriented photo/video show or flea market
in the near future somewhere in the D-FW area.
Thanks
Kent
214-497-4942
From: philg@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Philip Greenspun)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photograping Whales [8008s autofocus problem]
Date: 1 Sep 92 22:16:33 GMT
Reply-To: philg@martigny.ai.mit.edu
Organization: M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab.
In-reply-to: usenet@adobe.com's message of 1 Sep 92 17:23:13 GMT


In article <1992Sep1.172313.23153@adobe.com> usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS) writes:

   | Nikon autofocus is basically decorative.

		   -Philip Greenspun

   This comment is just MADE for flames! Big, orange ones!

Hold a Minolta 7xi in your hands for two minutes and pan it around a
camera shop or other cluttered space.  Then tell me that our Nikons
have autofocus.  What they really have is manual focus whereby you put
the sensor on top of what you want sharp, push the shutter release
halfway, then recompose.  Since all the lenses I use are f/2.8 or
faster, I find that this just gets in the way and it is easier to user
the older style manual focus (turn the ring).

What Minolta has is true autofocus.  The camera analyzes the scene,
taking into account data from multiple sensors, and always (in my
limited experience) picks some sensible collection of things to make
sharp.

Maybe the new Nikon N90 we heard about has something comparable.
Anyway, it is a safe bet that ten years from now people won't
recognize cameras with a little sensor area smack in the middle of the
frame and no other intelligence as "autofocus".

Philip Greenspun
MIT

P.S.  The Nikon press release actually shows how poor their
understanding of systems engineering is (if the fact that the old
SB-24 won't work fully with the new 6006 wasn't enough evidence).  It
is only now that they figured out that the camera would eventually
want to know what distance the lens was focussed at.  Nikon saved
adding a $0.50 pin to all the lenses they sold these last few years,
but people like us will have to toss $10,000 of lenses if we want to
take advantage of their latest technology.  If we all designed
software with this degree of shortsightedness...  we'd be really rich!
(MS DOS, MacOS, etc.)
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: AF speeds
Date: 4 Sep 92 20:43:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: clark.1992Sep4.204347.3490
Distribution: usa
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA

In article <1992Sep4.151239.20192@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>
>Again, you are heading in the right direction. Please
>do take my reply as a flame. Have a GREAT weekend!

I like that, succinct and to the point....:-)

Gary

-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
From: amolitor@nmsu.edu (Andrew Molitor)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Zone system with 35mm?
Date: 30 Aug 92 05:41:58 GMT
Organization: New Mexico State University

Summary: It's incident metering..

In article <1992Aug28.181744.6053@pony.Ingres.COM> bbarton@Ingres.COM
	(Brian Barton) writes:
>Stand in the exact same kind of light as your subject and parallel to it.
>
>Using your hand, fill your viewfinder with the palm of your hand and take a 
>meter reading off of it.  _DO NOT_ shade your camera with your hand, you're
>just taking a light "reading" off the palm of your hand.
>
>Let's assume it's f.16 @ 1/250th with Tri-x. (Bright sun.)
>
>Open up your camera one-stop (to f.11 @ 1/250th) and take the picture.
>Voila!  It's the Zone System.

	This isn't the Zone system... It's using your camera as an incident
light meter. Sure, deriving the system uses vaguely Zone System Facts,
to wit: your hand ought to fall on Zone VI, and your meter will place it
on Zone V, so give a stop more exposure. You are using your hand + camera
meter as a 'standardized' system for measuring the light falling on the
subject, I.E. and incident light meter.

	I know others have followed up as well, but I don't think anyone
pointed this out.

	Andrew

>Brian
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: bbarton@Ingres.COM (Brian Barton)
Subject: Ektachrome & Fujichrome
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Keywords: 
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
Date: 31 Aug 92 23:09:16 GMT

Just a brief note on my Ektachrome and Fujichrome adventures.

First of all, as far as "pushability" is concerned, I'd definitely vote
for Fujichrome because it's more versatile.

I tried pushing Ektachrome 100 Plus to 400 asa and it fell on it's nose.
(It was blocked-up and grainy and gross.)

Fujichrome 100 Professional pushed to 400 asa looks great!  I'd definitely
do that again in a pinch.

As far as Fujichrome 1600D is concerned, I confess to having had it pushed
to 6400 asa and it still holds up!  Well...it doesn't look great, but it'll
pass.  I've shot it at 6400asa for some candlelight vigils and it's
not bad.  (Nice grain.)  It's definitely passable and it holds up!  

BTW, can someone tell me what the best asa to shoot Velvia at would be?

I shot a bunch of Velvia at 50asa and I ruined it 'cause it was under-
exposed.  Is 32 the nominal asa?

Also, can someone recommend appropriate lens and flash filtration for
shooting 'chromes in sports arenas?  (Under Sodium Vapor lamps)  Is there
a Kodak Wratten that will do the job?

Thanks in advance.

Brian

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: CCGM000 <CCGM@MUSICM.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: Re: Photograping Whales [8008s autofocus problem]
Organization: McGill University Systems Inc (MUSIC/SP)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 17:17:35 GMT

In article <6092@transfer.stratus.com> savoia@sw.stratus.com (Rick Savoia) writes:
>
> ...................................... replacing all of the
> Minolta lenses you used to own with new ones for the xi
> series.  I'd rather lose some of my features and still be
> able to use some great lenses, than have to replace my
> lenses all together.
>
>Rick

   I must say that I am not at all impressed with Minolta's xi
lenses. And I won't be buying any for my xi body - they sound like
real battery burners. And at the cost of those non-rechargable
lithiums, I'd very much prefer to use muscle rather than buttons
to zoom and focus (when I want manual control).

Glen Matthews
MUSIC Product Group, McGill University
550 Sherbrooke St. West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 3C5
Phone: (514) 398-4477 Fax: (514) 398-4488 BitNet: CCGM@MCGILLM
Internet: ccgm@musicm.mcgill.ca   Anonymous FTP: vm.mpg.mcgill.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Cibachrome life expectancy ?
Date: 31 Aug 92 00:09:00 GMT
Organization: Curtin University of Technology

In article <phaf.35.715200575@giraffe.ru.ac.za>, phaf@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR A FERREIRA) writes:
> Greetings all
> 
> Does anybody know of any adverse effects to the life expectancy of 
> Cibachrome prints that are mounted sandwiched between two sheets of glass.
> The material type being used here is gloss. Could there be problems with 
> trapped moisture ?

Life? What life? ANY print will ferro-type to the glass in nothing flat.
You MUST use a mat to separate the print from the glass.

> Cibachrome is reputed to have a life of 100 years, is this 
> reasonable ?
> 

Cibachrome dyes are aniline type and quite stable. The figures I have seen quote
50 years, from very conservitave sources. But not if treated as above...

> If anyone has mounted Cibachrome prints in this way before I would be keen 
> to hear how it was does (ie how the prints were kept in place etc..)
> 

The best mounting will depend on size and how you want the finished item to
look. If you must have the 'frameless' look, use a very thin ( 1/4" ) 6 ply
rag board mat or ( much cheaper ) strips of rag board to separate the print.
Use thin glass and a good cored backing. Glass is too heavy for a backing. I 
use a thin faced Al frame anyway. Passe Partout or frame clips are the other
choices. I have never seen it, but a Passe Partout plus Swiss Corner Clips may
be strong enough to handle work over 20". Don't forget, if you want long life
that EVER little detail is out to get you.

~Paul
From: ivo@pyramid.unr.edu (Ian (Ivo) Veach)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Help with reversal printing from positives???
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:14:06 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: None.  No organization at all.  Try somewhere else!


Hi there.  Could some photoguru please give me a brief description or
source of information about reversal printing?  Does it destroy the positive?
Or is it just a sneaky way around an interneg?  Any personal preferences and/or
raves about going this route as opposed to standard internegs for slide to
print conversion?

Thanks much (in advance),

Ivo
ivo@cs.unr.edu
"To defy the laws of tradition, is a crusade only of the brave" - Primus

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: media permanence of wax xfer/ laser printers.
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 18:27:40 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.202926.21808@pica.army.mil>, smwall@aol.com (Steve Wall) writes:
>> 
>> So here's a question for you:  If I make a print from a Photo CD on my
>> (hypothetical :-() laser printer, how long will that last?
>> 
> Wait and see...All the fading problems in chromogenic prints don't
> necessarily apply to Dye Sublimation prints from Photo CD.  It's possible that
> the dyes/pigments used in oil paints could be adapted to Dye Sublimation 
> printing, making them as permanent as Black & White prints.  
> 
Grab a copy of a ..... brain fade... The good artist oil colour people, and
see what they say about perminance. I was amaized to see page after page of
info on the fadeing and staining of many pigments. Neuton and... someone? HELP!

Given the constraints that a wax transfer or xerographic printer will impose,
I would not be suprized if permanance is an 'also ran' in marketings requirements.

Does anyone out there know what the dyes/pigments used actualy are?

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: Nodal point on lens.
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 20:33:08 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <1992Sep3.234653.1@cc.curtin.edu.au> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes:
>In article <4860@daily-planet.concordia.ca>, honna@cs.concordia.ca (SEGEL honna) writes:
>
>
>About nodal slides...
>
>How critical is the parrelism of the mirror and screen?
>
>~Paul
>

Well, I started all this by posting a technique for finding nodal
points of a lens.  I just copied it out of Jenkins & White,
Fundamental's of Optics.  Although I've done it in a casual way, I've
never really checked my work against a "known standard" or anything
like that.  But I would guess that you couldn't be off in the position
of the nodal point by more that the mirror, axis, and slit were out of
parallel.  In other words, I don't think it matters much, but take
into account that this is net news where anyone can post without
having to prove their qualifications. :-)

  -- David Jacobson
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson)
Subject: C-41 push processing?
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 07:49:06 GMT
Organization: Data General AB, Akalla, Sweden

I'll have to shoot a couple of rolls of Kodak Ektapress 400
or 1600 and push process them. Since I do my own processing,
I figured it might be a good idea to find out how to push
process film in C-41 chemistry. The instruction sheet for
the chemicals doesn't tell me that. Is there anyone who
knows? Or are the processing instructions in the information
sheet that comes with the film (a la Fujichrome P1600)?

-- 
------------------------------ END OF MESSAGE ------------------------------
Robert Claeson                Internet: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com
Data General AB                         robert@sys.dg.se
Box 28                             CEO: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com:dg-smtp
S-164 93 KISTA                     Tel: +46 (0)8-92 55 00
Sweden                             Fax: +46 (0)8-751 36 22
From: bjs@uts.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Seeking advice on solarization.
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:59:39 GMT
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

Curt Gates writes:

>In article <19869@drutx.ATT.COM> chuck@drutx.ATT.COM (LucianoC) writes:
>> I have attempted this on a 
>> number of occasions with limited success. I would like to know what 
>advice
>> is out there about producing dramatic solarized images
>
>If you can locate it, try a special developer called Solarol, I believe.  
>You might have to call a few mail order houses. Hunt Drug in Massachusetts 
>used to stock it in their store.

I believe that I've seen this in the Light Impressions catalog.  They're
at 1-800-828-6216 and are a most reputable, indeed pleasant, firm.
Cannot recommend them too highly.

Barry


-- 


|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Barry Sherman, Amdahl Corp.       | "Any fool can face a crisis - it's     | 
| bjs@ruts.ccc.amdahl.com           |  this day-to-day living that wears you |
|                                   |  out." - Anton Chekhov                 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Amdahl, being a corporation, is a legal fiction.  Therefore it is incapable|
| of holding, let alone expressing, opinions.  Unfortunately, this has been  |
| said of me as well.                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: duane@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (duane.galensky)
Subject: Re: Canon A-1 Lens Recommendation
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:27:10 GMT

In article <1308@esl.ESL.COM> minh@bach.esl.com (Minh Huynh) writes:
>
>I recently traded my Canon A-1 for a Nikon 6006, - losing
>some functionality but gaining a few features in the
>process.  I had a Tokina 70-210 with a Canon FD mount
>which exhibited horrific pin-cushion distortion at 210mm.
>Then again, with the A-1, I could hardly afford the Canon
>antique FD lenses.
>
>Check the distortion, and don't buy Tokina.
>

now, now, let's not overgeneralize...   :-)

i'm an avowed nikon optics afficianado, but i do own two
tokina lenses: the 28-70/2.8 and the 400/5.6.  the 28-70
was rated very highly in this months popular photo tests...
and i'm fairly pleased with its performance (it does have
a modest amount of distortion and isn't as contrasty as nikkor
glass, but all zooms are by definition a comprimise.)
the 400/5.6 is completely serviceable and has suprisingly
little distortion...for $200, i think it's a good value.

for any manufacturer, quality varies from lens to lens.
and, it's really the utility versus price ratio that
you're trying to optimize.  if the 70-210 tokina costs
$100-ish, and a person doesn't shoot subjects with
straight lines or enlarge ISO 400 prints above 3.5 X 5,
it might be a perfect choice!

duane
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: fontana@cis.ohio-state.edu (Mark Fontana)
Subject: Developing your own motion picture film
Originator: fontana@apache.cis.ohio-state.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Computer and Information Science
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:21:33 GMT



I'm thinking of experimenting in 16mm by buying outdated b/w and
Ektachrome film at the local photo exchange and processing it myself.
(I have no problems hand processing normal B/W and E-6 film)
I've found a daylight tank for this purpose, which allows processing
of up to 100' of 8, 16, and 35mm movie film.  It's basically
two spools in an oval box with cranks protruding through the top and
light trap openings for the chemistry.

Loading the spools and developing the film should go okay, but I'm not
sure how to manage the film while drying it.  Obviously, it can't touch
adjacent loops of film, so do I:
 
    1) Dry the film relatively rapidly in one pass, as it comes out of
       the final wash/photo-flo?  Any suggests for how to do this?
       Maybe go through a ruuber squeegee and use a very light hair dryer?

    2) Hang it from the ceiling in a clean, dry room, hanging between
       opposite walls in large loops?

Would anyone care to share their experiences in hand processing movie film?
I'm wondering how hard it is to get consistent results (ie. the entire
length of film exposed to the first developer for nearly the same length
of time, despite the fact that for most of the time, the film is on
the spools, wound against adjacent layers!)


Mark
From: bbarton@Ingres.COM (Brian Barton)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Zone system with 35mm?
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:17:44 GMT
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1

In article <14657@mindlink.bc.ca>, John_Maxwell@mindlink.bc.ca writes...
>Just discovered this group, so forgive me if this question is an old chestnut
>or anything...
> 
>Is there a practical way to use the zone system, by which I mean using varying
>development times in conjunction with exposure calculations with 35mm film. I'd
>rather not bulk roll 5-exposure rolls. I heard somewhere that you can do
>something by fogging certain frames with a piece of ground glass. Has anyone
>ever tried this?
> 
>-JMax           John_Maxwell@Mindlink.bc.ca
> 

I would just assume rather explain how to repair a nuclear satellite than
explain how to use the Zone System with 35mm.  For some odd reason, I feel
up to the challenge.

To use the Zone System with B&W film and 35mm:

(The shortcut approach is what you're asking about.)

Stand in the exact same kind of light as your subject and parallel to it.

Using your hand, fill your viewfinder with the palm of your hand and take a 
meter reading off of it.  _DO NOT_ shade your camera with your hand, you're
just taking a light "reading" off the palm of your hand.

Let's assume it's f.16 @ 1/250th with Tri-x. (Bright sun.)

Open up your camera one-stop (to f.11 @ 1/250th) and take the picture.
Voila!  It's the Zone System.

It works every time.  I think I have a written "blurb" on this somewhere,
but I haven't been able to find it recently.

This works best when you're _not_ shooting in bright sunlight.  The best
time to use this is on overcast days.

Brian

p.s. Apologies to purists who will cringe at hearing this, but I've used
it for years and it works perfectly.
From: honna@cs.concordia.ca (SEGEL honna)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Canon EOS Rebel at high altitude and Cold - Problems ??
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:39:57 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec

In article <86881@netnews.upenn.edu> liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang) writes:
>In article <25140@castle.ed.ac.uk> hrvoje@castle.ed.ac.uk (H Hecimovic) writes:
>>Well, my experience comes from COLD Iowa winters. I took some photos
>>while it was -25 to -35C. I didn't see any difficulties. But, usually it
>              ^^^^^^^^^^^
>  
>  I'm very tempted to say bull&%$#.  But I've never been to Iowa.  My
>lithium battery died when it was not even +25F.  Do you realize how
>cold -35C is?  
I'd like to add a little anecdote...  Here in the northern regions, we
use the metric system and *just about* everyone over the age of ~10 is
familiar with metric and pre-metric measurement systems.

Years ago I was working in the kitchen of a restaurant here in Montreal
during the winter. It was cold outside - and I mean that.  A server who
was handling a busload of tourists visiting the city from the states
(where they still use the F scale) came into the kitchen and
asked me, in French, if I knew how cold -40 C was...I looked at her and
she told me that one of her customers wanted to know so that s/he could
write to loved ones state-side and tell them.  Knowing where the F and
C temperature scales intersect, I said "Tell 'em it`s really cold in any
language".  

Apropos the original posts...have you two gotten around to comparing 
notes on camera handling in the cold?  Did you both stow the body(at
least) inside your jackets between shots? etc.


HS/Michael

-- 
***************************************************************
honna segel
department of computer science
concordia university  *****************************************
Newsgroups: rec.photo