HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mvolo@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Michael R. Volow)
Subject: Minolta Spotmeter V wanted
Keywords: Minolta Spotmeter
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 01:19:18 GMT


Am interested in purchasing a Minolta Spotmeter V in excellent condi-
ion. Thanks.
-- 
Michael Volow, Psychiatry, Durham VA Med Center, Durham NC 27712
919 286 0411 Ext 6933               mvolo@uncecs.edu
From: dtalmage@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Joys of big ones (Was Re: Barnbaum and Sexton like the same rock?)
Date: 14 Oct 92 04:40:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: guvax.1992Oct14.084009.1452
Followup-To: rec.photo
Distribution: usa,world
Organization: Georgetown University

In article <caTM02R425.C01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman) writes:
> Jim Cathery writes:
> 
>>(No! I will
>>_not_ succumb to the wiggles [mphhh, grunt, arrrgh].)
>>
>>My local pusher, err, dealer has been waving used 4x5's in my face.
>>I wave back (so far).
>
> Careful!  Those big wigglers really *are* addictive.  And, just like any
> other addiction, you want more and more and more.  Or maybe I should say,
> bigger and bigger and bigger.  I keep finding new things to like about
> the big negs (or maybe I should say originals).
> 
My friend Tom has a 4X5 field camera he rescued from the trash.  I've 
watched him use it and I think I'd enjoy the slow pleasures of large format 
photography.  Unfortunately, it's too expensive in terms of time right 
now.

I think I've found a way to keep those wigglers at bay!  
So here's my plan:  I'm going to wait until I'm a father.  I expect to 
be even shorter of time then but I figure I'll need something like a 
large format camera to *make me slow down* long enough to decompress.

Think it'll work?
For you parents/aunts/uncles:  at what age did your 
kids/nephews/nieces become interested in your large format hobby?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Talmage (dtalmage@guvax.georgetown.edu)
"Once more.  This is deixis.  This is your brain on deixis.  Any questions?"
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: skaife@uk.tele.nokia.fi (Joe Skaife)
Subject: Enlarger Condensers and Light Source
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications, Transmission Product Development,
	Cambridge, UK
Distribution: rec.photo
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 08:30:36 GMT


Some time ago I obtained an old Kodak B&W enlarger with a tungsten source and
a pair of large condensers.

With just 35mm negs I can get the condensers and source to give me an ALMOST
even illumination, but the time has come to do a little better.

Does anyone know any good references for condenser and source optics in
enlargers?

I'm happy to make considerable changes to the source geometry as I am very
happy with the other features of this old dinosaur.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Joe Skaife,   Nokia Telecommunications,  Transmission Product Development -
-                    Cambridge, UK.  Tel:  +44 223 423 123                  -
- External Email: skaife@uk.tele.nokia.fi     Internal Email: NTL02::SKAIFE -
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mkuhn@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Martin W Kuhn)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Minolta 110 SLR Zoom
Date: 8 Oct 92 20:57:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Oct8.205720.839
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

In article <1992Oct6.223109.14664@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> wb@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (werner.baumgartner) writes:
>I recently picked up this camera for a good price and find it very
>interesting. However, I know very little about it. I was told it may
>be a valuable collectors item. I've loaded it up and am taking some
>pictures now. It seems to work just fine. Any information about this
>particular model would be appreciated.
 
The Minolta 110 SLR Zoom was made in the mid 70's and was probably the first
and most popular 110 SLR.  As far as I know, it is of fairly good quality,
though somewhat bulky.   As far as value is concerned, the usual asking 
price is around $75, which is currently pretty good for a 110.   
It's a fairly interesting camera, though not as "cute" as the Pentax Auto 110,
but more interesting in design than the later Minolta 110 Zoom SLR Mark II
(which looks like a somewhat undersized 35mm SLR, but much larger than
the Pentax.  In fact, I'd say the Mark II is bulkier than an Olympus Pen F,
despite the Pen's larger format...)
 
Anyway, have fun with your Minolta; like most "classy" 110's, it's quite
interesting, fun to use, but not currently a particularly valuable 
collector's item. 

                   --Marty

     
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: eugene@briar.lle.rochester.edu (Eugene Kowaluk)
Subject: Macbeth Color Chart
Organization: UofR Laboratory for Laser Energetics
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 14:17:31 GMT


Jeff DelPapa writes:
> Any pro oriented camera store should have them in stock. They are
> fairly expensive, mine was $30. a number of years ago.

> (since you live in rochester, you could also try light impressions,
> they should carry it)


No they don't, although their forte is in archival supplies and books.

I'm not sure where they're going with the photographic supplies they
do carry.  I've shopped there for over 20 years and watched their policies
change over the years.  Several years ago they thought they were an
art supply house until one day they had a tent sale and stressed they
were going back to their archival roots.

If you're in town, a visit to Light Impressions is a must (after the
IMP/GEH, of course).  They have a new gallery on the ground floor,
hundreds of books in their selection (matched only by the RIT
bookstore, followed by the photo bookstore at IMP/GEH & Visual Studies
Workshop), a custom framing shop, and their archival supplies are
second to none.  And don't forget the 2nds section, where I once bought
a case of 8x10 boards for $5.


eugene kowaluk
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: RSPEIRS@130.187.170.178 (RON SPEIRS)
Subject: Re: Cropping slides
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 05:58:28 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11

In <1992Oct8.173651.28212@javelin.sim.es.com> rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com writes:

> In article <1992Oct7.195453.610@andersen.co.uk> sdpage@andersen.co.uk (Stephen Page) writes:
> >Can anyone suggest a good way to crop slides for projection?
> >
> >I've seen masks in shops, but these look rather limited. The local photo
> >shop suggests using masking tape, which sounds rather unpleasant!
> 
> In the past, I had seen advertisements for an organization called Erie Slide
> Club in Erie, Pennsylvania.  They had available a large variety of slide
> mounts with many shapes (offset rectangles, ovals, circles, hearts, clubs,
> etc.)  I can't seem to find their address right now, but maybe someone else
> on the net may know it.
> 
> Also, you might try Porters Camera Store (Box 628, Cedar Falls, Iowa 50613).
> They offer a set of Slide Masks, 2 each of 101 shapes, $25.95 (price might
> not be current), stock # 59-0371.
> 
> Another thought:  You could take pictures of various shapes cut out of
> black paper, against a white background.  Shoot these on Kodalith film and
> then sandwich the kodalith with your slide in the mount.  You could make
> any shape you wanted that way.
> 
> Ron Speirs, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah
> 
I just found the address for Erie Color Slide Club Inc.:
     P. O. Box 672, Dept. D, Erie PA 16512

Ron Speirs

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tkerran@skyhawk.ecn.uoknor.edu (Tyler Kerran)
Subject: High-Speed Photography
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 05:09:01 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA


I am involved in high-speed photography research.  Particularly involving
computers to control the firing sequences of flashes.  I currently use an
Apple IIe to do this,  however,  I would like to use an IBM PC.  I have heard
that this is possible through the parallel printer port becuase unlike the
Apple,  the IBM game port does not have any annunciators that are capable
of firing a flash.  Does anyone have any information regarding this?

Also,  I am always looking for innovative ways to fire flashes without
using a computer.  These include infrared photogates and timer circuits.
If anyone has any ideas or actual working circuits,  I am certainly 
interrested.

One other thing,  I can currently control four flashes with my Apple
(it has four annunciator outputs),  however I know that it is possible to
control up to fifteen flashes.  Binary logic says that sixteen different
combinations are possible with four inputs,  one of them being zero.
Does anyone know of a circuit that will perform the switching necessary to
control fifteen individual flashes?  Please note that this cannot be     
accomplished by a computer program,  it must be an actual digital circuit.

Please send all questions and comments via EMAIL to:
   
          tkerran@mailhost.ecn.uoknor.edu


P.S.  Does anyone have any NEW and INNOVATIVE ideas for
        high-speed photographs?

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: phintena@Condor.mcs.kent.edu (Peter Hintenaus)
Subject: Re: Joys of big ones (Was Re: Barnbaum and Sexton like the same rock?)
Organization: Kent State University
Distribution: usa,world
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 14:03:21 GMT

Hi,

I just got a Linhof Technikardan in 2 1/4 * 3 1/4 (I whimped out) with a
Schneider Super Symar 120 and a Schneider Super Angulon 58. I have not taken
any pictures yet, but from playing around a little bit I guess I have to 
learn a lot about using the movements.

Seems one does not miss movements until one hase played with a camera which
has some. But once one had a chance to use them one does not want to give
them up any more. 

The only drawback of these wigglers is the bulk. I use to take my hasselblad
with 3 lenses and a tripod backbacking, on overnight hikes too, but no way
I can do that with the Linhof.

Peter
From: SteveWall@aol.com (Steve Wall)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: AGFA, Fuji, Kodak or ?
Date: 6 Oct 92 17:08:59 GMT
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Not if I can help it.

Filip Sawicki wrote:
> 
> In article <67111@cup.portal.com>, John_A_Pham@cup.portal.com writes:
> |> What's the different in quality of AGFA, Fuji or Kodak film.
> |> Assume it is all ISO 100 speed.  I do notice that Fuji film is
> |> cheaper than Kodak. 
> 
>    Take a look at the colors of the film boxes. They tell you the whole story
> (pros, please no flames!):
> 
> Konica is cold and bluish (good for architecture)
> Kodak GOLD is too warm (too much red and yellow) usually
> Fuji is too green IMHO
> AGFA has worst resolution and grain, but gives balanced colors
> 
> Of course, this is true mostly for amateur films developed and printed in cheap
> labs. Good labs will give you similar prints from any film, though they will
> still differ very slightly in color rendidtion.
> 
This response is very oversimplified.  Personally, my experience has been
that
when Fuji Reala is processed by a lab with no prior experience or a
preprogrammed channel, it will come out with a distinct magenta cast, just
the opposite of green.  'Warm' or 'Cold' or particular color qualities are
much more visible in slides.  In prints, you're almost entirely at the
mercy
of the printmaker, so choose a film for it's overall color accuracy, grain
size or saturation, and hope the printer does his job right.

My personal observations on 100 speed films:

Fuji Super HG 100:  High Contrast/High Saturation.  Good landscape/ outdoor
shooting film.  Too much contrast for flashshooting people if printing
at a high-volume lab.

Fuji Reala 100:  Medium Contrast/Saturation.  Good fleshtones and yet holds
saturation in other colors.  Good for flashshot/mixed light situations,
people film.

Kodak Gold 100 Plus:  Medium to High Contrast/Saturation.  Between the
two Fuji's in contrast.  Best film to have on hand when you don't know
what to expect.  (Also bring some Fuji NHG-400).

Kodak VPS 100:  Low Contrast/Saturation:  Optimized for people pictures.  

Kodak Ektar 100:  High Contrast/Saturation.  Visibly sharper than the
others above (which are all alike in grain/sharpness).  Some inconsistent
results in color reproduction, especially in reds/fleshtones.

Agfa:  Haven't tried any.  Not nearly as well distributed in the USA as
Fuji/Kodak.
From: jimc@tau-ceti.isc-br.com (Jim Cathey)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Barnbaum and Sexton like the same rock?
Date: 12 Oct 92 22:01:40 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: ISC - Bunker Ramo, Spokane, WA

In article <2803@ceylon.gte.com> kbb0@harvey.gte.com (Kevin Burke) writes:
>Barnbaum's article there is a reproduction of his "Boulder,Sunwapta
>...
>Must be one special rock. :)
>
>Regards, Kevin a.k.a. "I'm packing my stuff for Sunwapta Falls"

Not so special as wet rocks go, but it _is_ right there in your face.  I
just got back a couple of weeks ago from a vacation in these parks, and
I stopped at Sunwapta falls to try for my own rock shot.  It was
raining, and was altogether a pain in the ass to manage, carrying three
different cameras and all.  You have to hop the safety fence to get the
better compositions, and the rocks were nice and wet.  Slightly scary,
in a high-steel sort of way.

I just printed this neg the night before last, and the 8x10 I made is
OK, but not great.  Maybe if I fiddle with it some more.  One thing's
for sure, a 6x6 TLR at f/8 (its best aperture) doesn't have enough
DOF to do this shot right (the foreground rocks are soft).  (No! I will
_not_ succumb to the wiggles [mphhh, grunt, arrrgh].)

My local pusher, err, dealer has been waving used 4x5's in my face.
I wave back (so far).

-- 
+----------------+
! 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"
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: dp@world.std.com (Jeff DelPapa)
Subject: Re: Any good photo magazine atall???
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 23:06:33 GMT

In article <1bkn0tINN409@crcnis1.unl.edu> ablum@unlinfo.unl.edu (abraham blum) writes:
>Why is there no worthwhile high-quality american photo magazine - or 
>is there one?

I am rather fond of aperture. No iron, just images, printed very well.
Quarterly, fairly expensive.

<dp>



Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: daveb@Ingres.COM (Dave Brower, DBMS hack, [510] 748-3418)
Subject: Re: Macbeth Color Chart
Originator: daveb@lotus
In-reply-to: eugene@briar.lle.rochester.edu (Eugene Kowaluk)
Reply-To: daveb@lotus (Dave Brower, DBMS hack, [510] 748-3418)
Organization: Ingres, an ASK Company
Date: 7 Oct 92 18:15:15 GMT

Where does one get a Macbeth color chart, and how much do they cost?

thanks,
-dB
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: glp@tfs.com (Gregory Pease)
Subject: Re: Press Cameras
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:56:15 GMT

>	It exists.  A Graflex 1000 shutter for either a 135 f4.5
>Schneider or a 300+some telephoto.  It was offered as standard for the
>Super Speed Graphic 4x5.  Presumably, when Toyo bought the Graflex
>tooling and remarketed the camera as the Toyo Super Graphic they
>dropped the Graflex lens line in favor of Seiko shutters.  A 135mm
>Graflex 1000 runs about $300 on an electric board in Ex+ condition
>when you can find them.  You cock them by rotating the integral ribbed
>lens hood.
>--
>Gregory Finn	(310) 822-1511
>Information Sciences Institute, Marina Del Rey, CA 90292

The guy who works on my cameras loves these shutters.  He gets BIG bucks
to overhaul them, and evidently they need to be serviced pretty often!
Parts are hard to find, and getting harder.  He pretty much advised me
to stay away from them as "users," though I'd like to find on in nice
shape for my growing collection.  The problem is, I like to use what I
own, and it'll run about $200 to fully overhaul one that doesn't work,
and every one I have seen has been broken or abused in some way...and
they are not cheap even broken...<sigh>.

How about those beautiful black dial set, self cocking  synch Compurs 
from the thirties? (I recently aquired one with a 12" Dallon 
tele-Anastigmat, coated sometime after manufacture, with a delightful
little bubble in the front element.  A bit of pincushion, a bit soft,
but a very nice image quality.  The shutter works flawlessly!)

I have used 4x5 and 2x3 Speeds on the street, and recommend it!  IT
slows you down a bit, makes you think about things like lighting and
exposure and position, and is just a hell of a lot of fun!  Some folks
think you a nutcase, and talk about you as they pass.  Some think you
must be a "real serious" photographer.  Lots of people ask about the
camera, and the conversations can be pretty interesting.

Once, while visiting a painter friend, I was introduced to a pretty
interesting geezer, who said, "So.  You're a photographer.  What kind of
camera do you use."  I showed him my pre-war 4x5 Speed, and surprised
the hell out of him.  (I think he was expecting a point'n'shoot!)  Once
he found out that I respected the technology of his era, he was willing
to share dozens of anecdotes.  

Enough babble...
-- 
Gregory Pease    | "Is that a real poncho, 
glp@tfs.com      | I mean is that a Mexican poncho,
510/704-3133     | or is that a Sears poncho?"  -Zappa
From: liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Developing Illford film is Kodak developers
Date: 16 Oct 92 05:16:07 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


  I vaguely remember that Illford ID-11 is basically the same as Kodak
D-76.  Is this true? What about the dillusion ratios, are they the
same too.  I find it a pain because there seem to be no publication
indicating which chemical you should use with film of different
brands.  The processing time chart packaged with the film only tells
you what to do with the same manufacture's chemicals.  

  More specifically, I need to develope Illfor FP4 in Tmax or D-76 and
would like to know the proper time and dillusion ratio.

  Thanks.
From: ortiz@austin.lockheed.com (Joe Ortiz)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Nikon MF-21 Multifunction Control Back Forsale - $150 obo.
Summary: Nikon MF-21 Multifunction Control Back Forsale - $150 obo.
Keywords: Nikon, MF-21
Date: 13 Oct 92 22:05:40 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: "Lockheed Austin Division, 6800 Burleson Rd, Austin, TX 78744"

I have a Nikon MF-21 Multi Control Back forsale, new in box with original
manuals, unopened batteries, etc.  Didn't get a USA warranty card so I'm
guessing its grey market.  Got it as a gift and I already have one.  
I'm asking $150 or best offer.

Thanks,

joe

Reply to:

ortiz@austin.lockheed.com


-- 
ortiz@austin.lockheed.com
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: AGFA, Fuji, Kodak or ?
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:04:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewsm.1992Oct7.170436.7525
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <NICHOLS.92Oct6184454@osric.cs.odu.edu>, nichols@osric.cs.odu.edu (teresa nichols) writes:
> 
> Dumb question, but are the AGFA films E-6 process?
> 
> Teresa

Yes, Agfa slide films are E-6 (or at least E-6 compatible, Agfa may have
their own designation). I have used CT100 and CT200 and found them to be
quite good. Colors were neutral and grain was not a problem. However, they
did not show any characteristics that would make me give up Fujichrome (50
or 100) or Kodachrome 200. I didn't feel the Agfa films were quite as sharp
as the equivalent speed Fujichrome and Kodachromes, and I found the color
balance a little to cool and muted for my taste. I'm sure they are capable
of yielding fine results, but I think I'll stick to Fujichrome and Kodachrome.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: az1@ukc.ac.uk (A.Zafar)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Problems with the Nikon 601/6006?
Date: 11 Oct 92 10:52:25 GMT
Organization: Computing Lab, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.


	I had a problem with my 601 last year when I got it. It suddenly
stopped working. After a few problems (Nikon did not fix it properly) they
gave me a new one. This one worked great until last week. The built in flash
stopped working. It is back with Nikon now. The shopkeeper assures me that I
am the only one who has had problems with my camera and no other Nikon has
ever come back (This is a big chain in London). Could some 601/6006 owners
please reply and tell me if their camera have been okay? Thanks.

--
			 - Aman Zafar 			_   /|
			 - University of Kent 		\'o.O'
			 - England. 			=(___)=	
							   U
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: moonlit landscapes / stars (4x5)
Date: 16 Oct 92 14:05:17 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Oct15.182644.1@vms.ocom.okstate.edu>, chorley@vms.ocom.okstate.edu writes:
> In article <1992Oct15.011901.9934@beaver.cs.washington.edu>, franz@cs.washington.edu (Franz G. Amador) writes:
> > Does anyone know a good way to pick an exposure for a moonlit
> > landscape?
> 
> The sunny f/16 rule works for the surface of the moon because it is a 
> sunlit surface ( read Ansel Adams on Moonrise over Durango)
> 

It would if the moon were an 18% grey card, but it isn't. the reflectivity of
the moon's surface is quite low, requiring about 1 stop more than the
sunny f16 rule would indicate ("sunny f11"). This is of course for pictures
OF the moon and not BY the light of the moon. Bracket anyway for moon shots.

> > Also, does anyone have a good explanation for the effects of aperature
> > upon star trails?  I've heard it said that the aperature affects the
> > thickness of the trails, not their brightness, which depends strictly
> > upon the "light gathering" ability of the lens.  Is this right?
> Yes.
> The thicknes of the trails depends on a concept known as "circle of 
> confusion" ( By that I don't mean the newsgroup Alt.Scientology :-)
> ;-);-)

No, afraid not. Assuming the lens is focused right, the diameter of an in
focus star is a diffraction limited spot. Though in theory the diameter of
this spot will get larger as aperture is reduced, it will still be VERY
small - a couple of microns at f2.8 up to maybe 10 microns at f16 (note
1 micron = 1 millionth of a meter or 1/1000 cm). Star trails are wide
because of overexposure. This results in "halation" (sp?), the scattering
of light in the film emulsion to produce an exposed area much larger than 
the actual "point" of light causing the exposure. Thus bright stars
produce wider trails. You can actually estimate the brigtness (magnitude)
of a star wy the size of its image on film (after calibrating).

> 
> My final advice is for you to practice shots on velvia 35mm and waste
> relatively cheap film before you go investing in major silver.
> Please be advised that with long time exposures, the reciprocity failure, 
> which includes the fact that velvia, to my knowledge, isn't designed for long 
> time exposure will mean that the colour rendition will vary from extremely 
> unpredictable to ultimately SH*TTY.

Color rendition of moonscapes is a matter of taste. If it looked like a
sunscape there would be no point in taking it! If you really want to
color correct (based on Fuji data) you would need a moderate amount of
magenta filtration (10M for 16 seconds is the longest exposure Fuji
recommends, so maybe 20M or 30M). Reciprocity failure only applies to
exposure - Fuji recommend +2/3 stop at 16 seconds. I would guess +2 stops
for several minutes - but be sure to bracket just in case.


===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo