HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: garyf@puente.jpl.nasa.gov (Gary Friedman)
Subject: Re: Minolta SLR info wanted 
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Advanced Engineering Group
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 23:11:25 GMT

In article <0+xj!j#.ilsa@netcom.com> ilsa@netcom.com (Ilsa VanHook) writes:
>I have a couple of SRTs, and am shopping for another camera
>body.  Can anyone point me at a summary of features for minolta
>SLRs, especially the X-models (XD-, XE-, etc.)?  Opinions and
>rants about different models would also be appreciated.

Let's see...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

SRT 100, 101, 102, 201, 202, etc. 	- Good, basic, mechanical cameras
					  with match-needle exposure.

XE-5, XE-7				- Built like the SRT series,
					  but with electronically- 
					  controlled (aperature
					  priority) shutter.

XK 					- Built to compete against
					  Nikon's successful F2.  Is
					  essentially an F2 knockoff
					  with aperature-priority
					  exposure added.  Unless you
					  need the interchangeable
					  finders, get the XE-7
					  instead; it's far more
					  convenient to use.  
					  
XK Motor 				- The XK Motor is Minolta's first 
					  motor drive product; motor is
					  permanently attached to the
					  body and goes 3.5 fps.
					  These were assembled by hand
					  and are pretty much a historic 
					  anomoly.

XD-11					- Smallest SLR Minolta ever
					  made, and had the world's
					  smoothest and quietest shutter 
					  (for an SLR, that is.)  Had shutter-
					  and aperature-priority
					  exposure, as well as manual.
					  There is no OFF switch;
					  unless you're constantly
					  aware of the camera's
					  settings it's very easy to
					  make a mistake.  This was
					  the last Minolta to have a
					  mechanical backup shutter
					  speed ("B" and "O"), and the
					  first to start using the
					  more accurate slilcon
					  photodiode metering element.

XG-1, XG-7, XG-9, XG-SE, XG-M		- Avoid like the plague.
					  Minolta was chasing after
					  the "we-don't-know-anything"
					  market that Canon's AE-1 had
					  so successfully captured.
					  Liberal use of plastic/nylon
					  in the film transport gear
					  train.

X-700					- A little more respectable
					  than the XG lineup it
					  replaced.  This camera was 
					  designed to compete with Canon's 
					  successful AE-1 Program.  Still 
					  mostly plastic.

X-7					- Designed for insurance
					  claims.  Don't get this.

-----------------------------
The XE-7 and XD-11 were repackaged by Leica and sold as the R3 and R4,
as were some of Minolta's top lenses (50mm f1.4, 100mm f2.5, etc.).
(It's politically incorrect to say that, however.  It's like telling a
Porsche owner that he's driving a VW... :-) ).


						-Gary Friedman

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Friedman                   Jet Propulsion Laboratory - NASA
4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA.  91109        (818) 306-6193
garyf@puente.JPL.NASA.GOV || {cit-vax,elroy,psivax}!devvax!garyf
Organisation: European Space Operation Centre (E.S.O.C)
Date: Tuesday, 7 Apr 1992 12:35:00 CET
From: Jon <JBEST@ESOC.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: OM-PC (and OM-2SP) Problem

> Problems with drained batteries in OM-PC...

I've also had problems with batteries dying VERY fast in my OM-2SP. It
uses the standard 1.5V cells but they don't seem to last more than a
month or so - even when the camera's not being used much. Is there
really that much drain on the baterries (even when it's all switched off)?

I have also had problems with the batteries in cold weather. Outside in
the cold all the electrics die, when I get back into the warm and the
camera warms up again it all springs back into life!

It's been suggested that I should only use a certain type of battery
(lithium I think) to avoid the cold weather problem. Anyone else had
these problems? Do I really need to replace my batteries every month?
(EXPENSIVE!). Help....

   Jon
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: bullis@polari.com
Subject: Re: Printing-out papers
Reply-To: uunet!polari!bullis
Organization: Seattle Online Public Access Unix.  (206) 328-4944 (all lines telebit-equipped)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 18:01:59 GMT

stmwang@hubcap.clemson.edu (Sam Wang) writes:

>bullis@polari.com writes:

>>Linda Conner prints on POP, and I asked her where she got her paper.  Unfor-

>OK Larry. Is there much difference between the old Kodak Studio
>Proof and making your own Salt Print using fixed out photo paper?
>Figure you could answer that.

Not for sure.  My guess is that it doesn't, but that sounds like a lot of fun
to me!  

Actually, with all the nice papers on the market, why bother with fixing out
photo paper?  You've done salt prints, right?  what do you use for sizing?

Larry

bullis%polari@uunet.uu.net

(beware the "polari.com" address -- it doesn't work)
From: fcr@baron.ncsa.uiuc.edu (Fred Richards)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Looking for winder for Contax 159MM
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:48:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: ux1.1992Apr15.154803.24222
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

Does anyone out there know where I can find a
winder from my Contax 159MM?  If you have one that you
no longer want, or you have seen an ad for one somewhere,
would you please contact me.  I believe the model number
was W-7, but I'm not sure about that.

	Thanks,

		Fred Richards
		U. of Illinios
		f-richards@uiuc.edu
		(217) 244-6319
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jk@mitre.org (John Knobel)
Subject: Re: mechanical cameras
Organization: MITRE
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 13:42:30 GMT

I am new to this group, but I can't help mentioning the options in Canon 
mechanical cmaeras.

The New F-1, still in production but very expensive ($800+), offers mechanical 
backup to electonic shutter for all higher speeds and works quite nicely 
without a battery (w/o meter of course). Good used bodies run $450-550. The FD
series of lenses is still available. All sorts of options are available for
this system.

The old F-1, in two subtle variants, is out of production but widely available.
It is fully mechanical and extremely rugged. A wide range of accessories is 
available on the used market. It uses all FD lenses. Cost used is $250-350
,

Used FTb's are also a good bet. They use the FD lenses, are very rugged, have
a quick-load feature and are all mechanical. Used they run $125-175. Out of
production for 10+ years, but widely available and easily fixed.

See Peter Dechert's series on Canon SLR's in old Shutterbugs for more info.

John Knobel	

*** DIsclaimer: Opinons expressed are personal and are not those of any
		              organization. 
																				

Newsgroups: rec.photo,misc.forsale
From: mac1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Mubashir Cheema)
Subject: Canon EOS accessories (Zoom & flash) forsale !!
Summary: Canon forsale
Keywords: Canon forsale
Organization: Mississippi State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 04:45:33 GMT



  I sold my EOS REBEL and kept the following two items for use with
  EOS 650 that I was planning to purchase. It seems now that I've made up
  my mind on Canon Xapshot and therefore the following two items are forsale.
  
1. Canon Zoom Lens for EOS Cameras              $120
   EF 35-105m
   f/4.5-5.6



2. Kalimar Flash Light                           $60
   One of those big and impressive Flash units
   Model # : AFZ-6000 (for EOS series Cameras)
   Features include : Infra-Red, Auto Focus, Fully dedicated, TTL Thyristor,
   Bounce Flash with swivel zoom head, 5 year guarantee


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Mubashir Cheema: Computer Engineering student at Mississippi State University.
Amiga User and Star Trek Fan (me too :)
I can be reached at Fax/phone : (601) 325-5869  
Internet : mac1@ra.msstate.edu          Bitnet   : mac1@msstate.bitnet
US mail  : PO Box 4887, MSU             UPS/FedEx: 721 Hamlin, MSU
           MS State, MS 39762-4887                 MS State, MS 39762
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: bernard@tourng.enet.dec.com (Dave Bernard)
Subject: Re: photog. in Nat'l/State Parks etc.
Reply-To: bernard@tourng.enet.dec.com (Dave Bernard)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 13:35:30 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.165032.28622@talon.ucs.orst.edu>,
monson@caviar.ECE.ORST.EDU (Tyrus Monson) writes:
|> Newsgroups: rec.photo
|> Path:
|>
pa.dec.com!decwrl!mips!mips!pacbell.com!att!news.cs.indiana.edu!orstnews
s!monson
|> From: monson@caviar.ECE.ORST.EDU (Tyrus Monson)
|> Subject: Re: photog. in Nat'l/State Parks etc.
|> Message-ID: <1992Apr13.165032.28622@talon.ucs.orst.edu>
|> Sender: usenet@talon.ucs.orst.edu (Usenet News admin)
|> Nntp-Posting-Host: caviar.ece.orst.edu
|> Organization: Oregon State University, Corvallis
|> References: <1992Apr8.182940.3139@odin.corp.sgi.com>
|> <1992Apr9.191828.6301@talon.ucs.orst.edu>
|> <f43y02fMc4tD00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
|> Distribution: usa
|> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 16:50:32 GMT
|> 
|> In article <f43y02fMc4tD00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> bjs@uts.amdahl.com
|> (Barry Sherman) writes:
|> >>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
|> >
|> >Apparently there *is* something going on here.  At a recent workshop
|> wiht
|> >Ray McSavaney he told of a couple of incidents which were very
|> disturbing
|>                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> >to me.  Apparently at some or more California State Parks
|> professional
|> >photographers are now being required to obtain permits.  It seems
|> that
|> >at least a part of the reason is due to liability law suits -
|> people
|> >tripping over the tripods and suing the state under the "deep
|> pockets"
|> >doctrine.  Photographers falling off cliffs and suing the state. 
|> The
|> >photographer is required to demonstrate some fairly significant
|> level
|> >of insurance before being issued a permit.
|> >

	The liability issue of tripods sounds ridiculous.  It seems much more
	dangerous to allow automobiles into parks, from a liability standpoint.
	By any chance, there wouldn't be a... fee involved with these permits,
	would there?  Sounds like Revenue Enhancement 101.

	Even if this were the case, a simple release after the session should
	suffice.  Bureaucracy at work.

		Dave
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jchen@flash.bellcore.com (Jason Chen)
Subject: Sigma's Zen finish
Reply-To: jchen@flash.bellcore.com (Jason Chen)
Organization: Bellcore, Morristown NJ
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 01:05:53 GMT

In article <74042@netnews.upenn.edu> liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang) writes:
>In article <1992Apr14.015004.4065@walter.bellcore.com> jchen@flash.UUCP (Jason Chen) writes:
>>
>>BTW, I recently ordered a Sigma 70-210 APO. But I am rather dissappointed 
>>in finding out that they shipped me one without the "Zen" finish. I will
>>see if I can get this problem corrected.
>
>
>  You actually WANT one with the ZEN finish?!!!  Have you noticed that
>the Zen finish lenses are all a bit cheaper than the other lenses.  I
>have 2 sigma lenses with the Zen finish and I hate them.  It's nothing
>but a cheap, dull looking rubber-plastic that is not at all easy to
>hold.  In fact, the Zen finish really like to attract dust.  This
>"Zen" finish crap has got to rank right up there with the best
>Canon-Minolta yuppie advertizing slogans.  (nothing can beat the EOS
>Elan's ability to allow you to experience "oneness" however.  Even
>with Zen finish you can at best expect to experience
>one-and-a-quarter-ness.)   It's no big deal if you have it, just don't
>let anybody know what it's called.  If they sent you one without it,
>count it as a blessing.
>
>Zen and art of lens maintenance NOT.
>
I admit that I have seen or felt the Zen finish yet. But I assume if Sigma
spends so much money to market it, there should be some merit to it.

A couple of months ago, there was an test report on Sigma 75-300 APO with
the Zen finish. The editor seemed to like the feel of the Zen coating.
Of course, he might have a reason to.

Since "feels" are quite subjective, I would appreciate other opinions about
the Zen stuff. Thanks.

C. Jason Chen 
jchen@flash.bellcore.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: GE.DWS@forsythe.stanford.edu (Drew W. Saunders)
Subject: Re: mechanical cameras
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 15:31:49 GMT

In article <167C3DD92.SETTLE@LSTC2VM.stortek.com>,
SETTLE@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Jeff Settle) writes:
>In article <6455@shodha.enet.dec.com>
>j_feldman@blkice.enet.dec.com ( ) writes:
>
>
>>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.
>>
>>jimf
>>
>
>The Nikon FM2N is a currently production all mechanical camera.
>It is not cheap but gets into a line that seems concerned with
>backward compatibility.
>
>Jeff

The Leica R6 is all mechanical, as is the M6 (not a SLR, though).
Furthermore, there are Russian cameras, SLR's and RF's, that are
still in production (at least in theory, if not in practice), that
are all mechanical.

Drew
From: johnson@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Cole Johnson)
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 00:06:59 GMT
Subject: Re: Recommendations?  (Was fungal growth on lenses)
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server
Newsgroups: rec.photo

My grandfather gave me a camera that he had shoved in the back 
of a closet for years.  It was a Canon (Leice range finder look-
a-like) with the words "Made in Occupied Japan" stamped on the
boottom.  Unfortunately this closet was in Okinawa and the fungi
destroyed a couple of the lenses and the inside of the range 
finder.  I sent it to Canon and they said they could replace the        
shutter that was bad but they couldn't do anything about the       
fungus.

Too, bad.  It was a cool camera.
From: rjn@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Niland)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: question about mirror lenses
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:50:24 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard/WSY Ft.Collins,CO,USA

In rec.photo, John Mavroudis <YSZBH@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:

> I would like to know what the advantages (obviously size)
  * Weight (can put camera on tripod instead of lens)
  * Few surfaces means you can add an extender without significant losses.
  * Generally cheaper than spec-equivalent refracting lens.
  * Tends to have less focus drift in hot sun.
  * You can almost always have it with you (light, fits in camera bag)

> and disadvantages of the mirror lenses are.
  * Aperture typically f8 (refractor with same focal length can be faster)
  * Small aperture may not illuminate split-circle focusing adequately.
  * Fixed aperture (no depth of field control)
  * Camera usually needs "stop-down auto exposure" for minimum hassle.
  * No / or expensive screw-on front filters.
  * Limited selection of drop-in filters 
  * May need neutral density filters for fast film in bright light.
  * Out-of-focus highlights are circles rather than spots.
  * May have no auto-focus versions available.

You need to nail down the "usually" and "may" items before you buy.  In my
case, it was just luck that my Canon A-1 had stop-down AE when the time came
to get the RF-500.

Regards,                                              Hewlett-Packard
Bob Niland      Internet: rjn@FC.HP.COM               3404 East Harmony Road
                UUCP: [hplabs|hpfcse]!hpfcrjn!rjn     Ft Collins CO 80525-9599

This article represents only the opinion[s] of its author, and is not an
official or unofficial position of, or statement by, the Hewlett-Packard
Company.  The text is provided for informational purposes only.  It is
supplied without warranty of any kind.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS)
Subject: Re: Has anyone tried the Kodak/Nikon electronic camera?
Originator: asanders@sparta
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 17:16:39 GMT


| Kodak has an electronic camera that is based on a Nikon
| F3 with a special back.  It grabs 1280x1024 with 24 bits of 
| color - better than HDTV quality (and some color films).

					-Rob Silvers

At the last MacWorld Expo in San Francisco, I looked very 
carefully at some prints made with this camera. It does indeed
use a CCD array of more than 1.25 million pixels. But the
resulting images are *very inferior* to prints made with any
off-the-shelf color film and a point-and-shoot camera. In fact,
I'd venture to say that you could use the cheapest film, the
cheapest camera with the cheapest plastic lens, and the cheapest
processing and printing, and still get images vastly superior to 
the results obtained with this $20,000 wonder camera. For photo-
journalism (and newspaper reproduction), it may be wonderful, but...

						-Alan

From: peterd@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (Peter Davidoff)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 18:54:56 GMT
Subject: Re: Which meter reading to take?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Greeley, CO
Newsgroups: rec.photo

Barry:

Re: Seals (the 18% variety)... Check the latest Calumet
catelog in the NEW SUPPLIES section.  I think you could
choose the male, female, or family set.

Regards,
  Peter
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul H. Rubin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Need source for lens repair tools
Date: 8 Apr 92 00:00:23
Organization: CSUA/UCB
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: meastman@adobe.com's message of 7 Apr 92 17:35:29 GMT

	Ed Romney
	Box 96
	Emlenton, PA 16373

has a good selection camera and lens repair tools, materials, and
books.  He seems to have a good no-nonsense attitude but concentrates
mostly on older, mechanical equipt.  Send him $1 for a catalog.  I
have not yet ordered anything but probably will sometime.  Some of his
prices seem a little steep but I think it is certainly worth $1 to get
a catalog and decide for yourself.  It lets you see what is available
even if you don't get anything.

From: daved@hplsla.hp.com (Dave Dintenfass)
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1992 16:33:45 GMT
Subject: Re: Camera Leather--covering for older cameras.
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

Try your local bookbinder.  People who do custom binding often
have very thin leather around, or know where to get it.

You might also try Tandy Leather, though I had trouble finding
anything thin enough; this was about eight years ago.

Good luck.

Dave Dintenfass
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: michelle@play.esd.sgi.com (Michelle Boyd)
Subject: Re: photog. in Nat'l/State Parks etc.
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 02:19:51 GMT


In article <6487@shodha.enet.dec.com>, j_feldman@blkice.enet.dec.com ( ) writes:
|> 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

I talked to someone at park headquarters (?) in Half Moon Bay who
asked a couple of questions relating to how much insurance I carried.
She then said that until I get REALLY famous ot to worry about
getting a premit.  I concluded that they are really worried about
insurance and other people in the park tripping over a tripod
or the photographer's entourage.  I don't think that they care 
about photographer's profitting from the park system as much
as they care about people who move lots of equipment into a park
having lots of insurance in case anyone gets hurt.

michelle
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: mechanical cameras
Date: 10 Apr 92 01:33:34 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

GE.DWS@forsythe.stanford.edu (Drew W. Saunders) writes:
: Furthermore, there are Russian cameras, SLR's and RF's, that are
: still in production (at least in theory, if not in practice), that
: are all mechanical.

This brings into mind the possibility that as soon as (relatively) free
trade opens up between the U.S. and Russia, that very inexpensive Russian
cameras will be available here.

I think it would be interesting to own one.  Does anyone know much about
the Russian brands?  The only one I know of is Kiev.  Are the lens mounts
compatible with Nikon by any chance, or is that asking too much?

- Jay Ts
From: liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Minolta SLR info wanted
Date: 15 Apr 92 18:42:18 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Apr15.175131.1986@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov> garyf@puente.jpl.nasa.gov (Gary Friedman) writes:

>theory.
>
>	Minolta owns Leica.


  It shouldn't be hard find out if it is true.  I think they've
participated in some joint ventures, but I doubt Minolta owns Leica.


Some of these japanese camera companies have ties with German
companies since before WWII.  That I've read in a magazine
(shutterbug?).


>	Minolta				Leica
>	----------------------------------------
>	XE-7				R3, R3MOT
>	XD-11				R4, R5
>	50mm f1.4			(same)

which version of the leitz 50mmf1.4?

>	100mm f2.5			(same)
>	CLE				CL


  I saw an R4 and my cousin has an XD-11.  The XD-11 does not have
programmed auto exposure (if I recall correctly) and the R4 does.  The
R4 also has spot metering - does the XD-11?  The most unique feature I
saw on the leica is the strange looking meter plate behind the mirror
and the fact that the mirror is "cam controlled" - it does not swing
all the way up and strike a foam shock absorber like I've seen in all
other cameras.  Does the XD-11 does the same?  If not, then I'd have
to say that the two are hardly the same camera.  They may share
similar technology somewhere but don't all cameras?

  I haven't tried and R5 but it has a top shutter speed of 1/2000 and
the XD-11 I remember can only go up to 1/1000.

  I do agree that Leica cameras are overpriced.  They are better but
not THAT much better.


  Anyway, I sincerely hope there will never be a leica that looks like
the Maxxum 7xi.




Xref: sparky rec.photo:6818 misc.legal:8956 alt.bbs:3352
From: larry@news.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,misc.legal,alt.bbs
Subject: Re: Ways of chilling or banning Usenet
Date: 7 Apr 92 21:00:57 GMT
Organization: Feeds-R-Us

finn@isi.edu (Greg Finn) writes:

>	This is interesting.  How do you explain the repeated arrests
>for movie/recording pirating?  Living in Los Angeles I often hear
>reported FBI and local arrests for this, often accompanied by film of
>thousands of cassettes or VHS tapes being confiscated.  Pretty wierd

having been to the bahamas on regular basis it is interesting to
go into video stores where all of the movies on the shelves are 
bootleg copies recorded from american cable channels --  

-- 
 =*= Larry Snyder, Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-0777 - 10 lines =*=
      internet: larry@gator.rn.com        uucp: uunet!trauma!larry