HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Time to boycott Photo CD
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 18:42:11 GMT

dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman) writes:

[...]
>I think what is being overlooked here is that if there is a real need
>for photo-CD that is easily manipulateable, etc., somebody will come
>out with a competing format that is not so inscrutable.  Just because
>Kodak invents something, it's not locked in stone forever as the
>dominant format.  Remember disk cameras?  127 slides?  Flash cubes?
[...]

A counterexample: Polaroid's instant photography

- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: Robert Koch <Bob Koch@SAIC.Dayton.ccmail>
Subject: Re: Recommend slide labelling program?
Organization: Science Application International Corp.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1a2
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:34:29 GMT
X-Posted-From: koch.dayton.saic.com
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hall@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (John Hall)
Subject: Bowens front pro back ground
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 04:39:37 GMT


I am after infomation on the Bowens Front Pro Back Ground 
Projector. Has anyone used it or know of a similar system.
		John Hall
		hall@extro.ucc.su.oz.au

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ar12@quads.uchicago.edu (Richard Nixon)
Subject: Re: selenium wash
Reply-To: ar12@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:19:16 GMT

A note: Selenium does not yeild the REDDISH-BROWN tones the original
post refers to- it yeilds neutral tending towards cool blacks- overtoning
at too high a concentration yeilds a very unappealing purple hue. Note
also that selenium is a very mild toner- with if using what is basically
a neutral to cool toned paper to begin with, the effect is almost negligible.
It does, however, neutralize the slightly greenish tone of some neutral
but tending towards warm papers. Anyway, selenium is probably more valued
for its archival effect than for toning...
Getting back to the reddish-brown blacks, I've been wondering how they're toned
myself- by the way, I don't think we're talking sepia toning which yeilds
softer, all brown tones. Has anyone out there had experience with any
other toners? 
While we're on the topic, has anyone played with Kodak Polytoner? What 
does it do?
Andre
.

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson)
Subject: Re: Fuji Slide Film or Pushing Kodachrome
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:53:13 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Data General AB, Akalla, Sweden

In article <1992Aug26.205958.29549@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com>, kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com (Ken J. McFadden) writes:

> I would be willing to try Fuji slide film, but I know some of Fuji's films have
> "better than real life" colors.  So what I would like to know is which Fuji
> slide films offer more realistic colors and are they available in ISO 200 or
> 400?

Fujichrome 100's color saturation isn't all that different from Ektachrome
100 Plus'. Fujichrome 100 can easily be pushed to ISO 200 with minimal
image degradation. If ISO 400 or higher is needed, try Fujichrome 400.
I like it a lot better than Ektachrome 400.

-- 
------------------------------ 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
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jchen@smdsctt.bellcore.com (C. Jason Chen)
Subject: Re: Need film recommendation for baby's birth
Reply-To: jchen@ctt.bellcore.com
Organization: Bell Communications Research
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 14:21:17 GMT

In article <17serdINNne@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>, holland@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Rich Holland) writes:
|> jchen@flash.bellcore.com (Jason Chen) writes:
|> 
|> >The Fiji films were developed in a local drug store. Overall, they came
|> >out fine, except that the skin tone is somewhat greenish. That may be due
|> >to processing.
|> 
|> ...or the subject matter.  :-)
|> 
:-) :-) :-). That too.

-- 

C. Jason Chen                 
**************E-Mail: jchen@ctt.bellcore.com
**************V-Mail: (908)699-6993
**************P-Mail: 444 Hoes Lane, 1E229, Piscataway, NJ
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: A FAQ
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 20:09:09 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.175701.7350@sj.nec.com> yi@tdd.sj.nec.com (Yi Zhang  x2912) writes:
>This is probably a FAQ. 
>
>For CANON-EOS, the auto focus motor is in the lens, 
>while for NIKON the motor is in the camera body. 
>
>What are the advantages/disadvantages for these two different systems ? 
> 
>Y.Z.

Oops....I said in my earlier post if you held the both cameras
you would notice the difference immediately.  Of course, what
I meant is once you focused with them, you would notice the
difference.
-- 
        ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
 		"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination
	       is out of focus."   -     Mark Twain
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: A FAQ
Date: 3 Sep 92 04:36:49 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Pacific * Bell

In article <22313@venera.isi.edu> finn@dalek.isi.edu (Greg Finn) writes:
>In article <1992Sep2.053852.15441@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>
>>It is common knowledge in the industry and most unbiased
>>photo sales persons that the CANON AF lenses focus faster.
>
>	Odd.  That's not what I heard.  It seems to depend
>	on whom you ask.  The people that I asked sold Canon
>	and most other lines too.  I assume that they were biased.
>	
>>If you need facts, it is obvious that you should seek and
>>read for yourself.  I am not in the business of "testing"
>>lenses across the board.
>
>	I did set up lenses on tripods in a controlled setting
>	and tested two lines some time ago, with a few
>	lenses for each line, using top-end AF bodies for both.
>	I have reasons to be suspicious, but you could be right.
>	If someone has objective data ... speak up please.
>--
I just wanted to state for the record that I have no
problem with this response.  It shows you are inclined
to have an open mind.  Hopefully, I will also strive
for the same.  I am curious though on your method(s) used
in your controlled setting.  What measurement tool/guide
did you employ to determine focusing speed?

I also wanted to state that my style of writing is not
intended to flame anyone.  I apologize if I came across
to you this way.  Peace.

-- 
        ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
 		"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination
	       is out of focus."   -     Mark Twain
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photo-CD - THE FACTS
Date: 3 Sep 92 06:18:54 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

barnick@mesa.Kodak.COM (William M Barnick x73638) writes:
: In article <1992Sep1.173748.28224@kodak.kodak.com> axman@acadia.Kodak.COM (Mike Axman) writes:
: >  We can't compete with that Tampa
: >weather, but Rochester has it's charm.
:               ^^^^
:               ||||
:               RAINchester, it looks like Rochester, but you would have to
:               blow dry it for about a month.
: Sorry, Mike.  I just had to correct ya on that one.
: 
: See Ya ...
  ^^^^^^ Around here, we say "Seeeeeya!"

[Pay careful attention while I perform a minor feat of magic and put this
thread back on the subject of photography :-) :-) -- no criticism intended,
of course]

Due mostly to a visit to Traffic Court this evening, I am very down on
Tampa (for about the Nth time...).  Let me simply say that despite the
weather, there are a LOT of people here, including myself, who would
warn you away from this area.

I have only visited Rochester once, and only for an afternoon (in the summer),
and my main reservation about the area was not the weather, but rather the
decidedly unaesthetic (read: harsh, nasty) *appearance* of the place!

How is it that Photography Town, U.S.A. can have such a repulsive appearance
-- or is it just that I received a bad impression while I was fighting my
way through downtown traffic in my search for one of the very few bookstores
that carry AT&T UNIX System V manuals in Upstate NY?  It was 2-3 years ago,
but somehow it left a bad memory...

Out of curiosity, are there any good things to photograph in Rochester?
If I ever visit there again, I would like to obtain a good stock photo,
showing Rochester as the "capital of photography".  Something that might
help people feel proud to live in the U.S., if that is possible anymore.

(I hope I'm not offending any patriotic rednecks out there.  My visit to
Traffic Court resulted in all of my basic sensibility being violated. I
hope to recover.)

Jay Ts
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: fuji films resolution.
Date: 2 Sep 92 17:03:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewsm.1992Sep2.170353.10788
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <54jnjkp.benoit@netcom.com>, benoit@netcom.com (BENOIT SCHILLINGS) writes:
> I'm looking for the resolution in line/mm for the FUJI HG400
> and the FUJICHROME 100.
> Does anybody has the fuji info ?

I can give you the numbers, for what they're worth:

Fujicolor Super HG 400 - 50 lp/mm @ 1.6:1; 100 lp/mm @ 1000:1 (contrast)
Fujichrome RDP 100 - 50 lp/mm @ 1.6:1; 125 lp/mm @ 1000:1

HOWEVER, manufacturers numbers are NOT a reliable guide to resolution. For
example, Fujichrome 50, Fujichrome 100 and Fujichrome 400 ALL have a resolution
of 125 lp/mm for a 1000:1 contrast target according to Fuji. The 50 and 100
speed films also have identical resolution at 1.6:1 contrast (50 lp/mm) with 
the 400 at 40 lp/mm. It is evident to anyone who has used these films that
fujichrome 50 has higher resolution than the 100, both have much higher
resolution than the 400 speed film. Fuji also give the diffuse RMS granularity
value of 11 to BOTH fujichrome 50 and 100, whereas in practice the 50 speed
film can be seen to have finer grain. Kodak, by the way, are no more consistant
than Fuji in their film ratings.


===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Subject: Re: Expansion cards for Minolta 7xi camera
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 02:17:43 GMT
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.

In article <1992Aug25.164408.4634@unlinfo.unl.edu> sanjiv@cse.unl.edu (Sanjiv K. Bhatia) writes:
>I am totally at a loss about how the fantasy effect is produced without the
>card.

you zoom while the shutter is open. on the xi lenses, you also have to keep
refocusing. probably impossible to do manually ...


-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

"I can't get no satisfaction ...", M. Jagger
"Yeah, right, tell me another one Mick.", P. Ronzone

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Subject: Re: large format, zone system, hat hair and other silliness
Reply-To: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 23:41:52 GMT

After living in the west (Colorado) for about 11 years, I finally stumbled on
why cowboys are NOT required to (nor will they except under duress) remove
their hats.  IT'S HAT HAIR!  This is in fact, one of the unpublished reasons
why Ansel Adams was so fond of the Southwest.  He could wear his hat (for
photographic purposes) and NOT be required to remove it when he entered
buildings.  All this other "asthetic" stuff was just so much "used fixer" for
the California intellectuals he was forced to hang out with.  It is also not
well known that Ansel had a promissing carreer as a keyboard player at a
business involving women of "negotiable" virtue.  His snooty parents forced him
to give this up and undertake a carreer in photography instead.  The formation
of the F/64 group was a natural extension of his rebellion.

;'{)}
jimf

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: TSOS@uni-duesseldorf.de (Detlef Lannert)
Subject: Re: Designing fast non-50mm lenses
Organization: Universitaetsrechenzentrum, Heinrich-Heine-Universitaet, Duesseldorf
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:21:31 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.164422.10594@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com> kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com (Ken J. McFadden) writes:

>In article <1992Aug24.184815.735@research.nj.nec.com> markl@research.nj.nec.com (Mark Lee) writes:
>>
>> ... it is easy to
>>get a small, light, relatively cheap 50mm, f/1.8 or better, with
>>excellent image quality.  While there exist some moderately wide-
>>angle (24mm to 35mm) and short telephotos (85mm to 135mm) with 
>>f/1.4 to f/2, you generally pay through the nose for these, and
>>they are noticeably larger and heavier than the 50mm's. 
>>
>>It seems to me (naively) that getting a larger maximum aperture
>>should become easier as the focal length decreases, if only
>>because the physical dimensions needed for fast telephotos are
>>daunting (a 200mm f/1.4 would require a front element diameter of
>>at least 110mm). ...
>
>I know practically nothing about lens design, but a lack of knowledge on any
>particular subject has not stopped me from posting articles in the past, so ...

... so why should it stop *me* now? ;-)

I agree that for telephoto lenses the necessary diameter of the front
element contributes considerably to their price (and weight).
For a 200/1.4, however, you would need at least 200/1.4=140mm front
element diameter. Actually a bit more because "f/1.4" should not 
just reflect the geometric properties but also account for the loss
of light due to reflection and absorption within the lens. (If you
select an aperture of 1.4, the amount of light reaching the film plane
should be independent of lens design, number of groups/elements etc.)

I also agree with all those who have stated that the main difficulty
with fast wide-angle lenses lies in the necessary distance between
lens mount and film plane (for SLR's). But don't forget that wide-angle
lenses create a host of other problems as well: vignetting, distortion
and astigmatism can only be corrected satisfactorily by adding further
or more complicated elements. This gets worse the shorter the focal
length and the faster the lens is to be.

Some fast wide-angle lens designs even use aspheric elements; I wonder
if Pentax were the first to "cheat" and to mould an aspheric plastic
ring onto the spheric front lens of their new 24/2.0. Has anybody
heard of other manufacturers using the same technique? Would you have
any faith in such a construction? (What about the long-term stability
of the compound or the resistance of plastic to UV radiation or ...??)

--
Detlef Lannert      DC3EK      E-Mail: tsos@rz.uni-duesseldorf.de
"Ab morgen wird gearbeitet."
From: victor@sanpin.segcad.hlo.dec.com (Victor Ma)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Film Developing Stores
Date: 1 Sep 92 17:59:22 GMT
Organization: AOSG

I am new to the Hudson MA area.  I have several
Ektapress 400 that need to be push processed
to 1600, Ektachrome EL 400 push to 800, and
Ektachrome EPD 200 pull to 100.  I am looking
for reliable shop that charge reasonable rate.
Any comment would be welcome.

thanks,

Victor 
Xref: sparky rec.photo:15513 alt.cd-rom:2946 gnu.misc.discuss:2902 misc.int-property:922
From: jimb@occs.cs.oberlin.edu (Jim Blandy)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,alt.cd-rom,gnu.misc.discuss,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Time to boycott Photo CD
Date: 4 Sep 92 06:32:56 GMT
Organization: I see no organization here.
X-Posted-From: occs.cs.oberlin.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu


In article <glcnc4@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:

   >The only people who can read/write the Photo CD files are commercial
   >vendors who pay Kodak royalties.

   As an enthusiastic photographer and user who is waiting on this product 
   with bated breath, I say "who cares?"

As a programmer who is interested in image processing, I do, and I'll
bet that you should, too.

I'll assume that Kodak has patented its image format; if that is not
true, I'd love to hear what's really going on.

The United States' Constitution says that the purpose of patents is to
"promote the progress of science and the useful arts."  Since the
patent system, like any human endeavor, is an imperfect implementation
of that ideal, individual patents may actually backfire, and help the
patent holder at the expense of "science and the useful arts."  (See
the position paper of the League For Programming Freedom on software
patents for many fine examples of such unhelpful patents; it is
available via anonymous FTP from prep.ai.mit.edu as
pub/lpf/patents.texinfo or patents.ps.)

The licensing requirements can only be justified if they enable Kodak
to afford to develop Photo CD in the first place.  Aside from that
concern, consumers would benefit more from having the format freely
disseminated, for the following reasons:

1) Competition clearly has a positive impact on the quality of a
technology.  You *know* why computer chips are so cheap these days.

2) As Barry Margolin points out, licenses do *not* discourage poor
implementations.  You can't judge the quality of a product by looking
at the corporate organization of the producer.

3) The wider the distribution, the faster the development.  My
favorite illustrations of this principle are Unix and GNU Emacs.

It's not clear to me that Kodak's patents on the Photo CD format are
strictly necessary to support the research.  I'm sure Kodak puts an
enormous amount of effort into development of their 35mm technology,
even though they don't have a patent on that format; if they can
afford to develop that in the presence of other 35mm film
manufacturers, can't they afford to do the same thing with Photo CD?
After all, people buy Kodak 35mm film because it's *better*, not
because it's the *only* 35mm film available, right?

I think Kodak should have every right to copyright their code, make
their algorithms trade secrets, concoct proprietary hardware which
makes their implementations so fast nobody else compares, create and
patent new WORM technology, etcetera.  But patenting the format seems
an unnecessary measure which dampens public innovation and thereby
hurts the public interest.  It is of value to everyone to have the
best Photo CD technology possible.  I worry that Kodak's position may
contribute more to Kodak's coffers than the public good.
--
From: madler@vssad.enet.dec.com (Michael C. Adler)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Masking glass negative carrier
Date: 4 Sep 92 16:01:11 GMT
Reply-To: madler@vssad.enet.dec.com (Michael C. Adler)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


Does anyone have any clever ideas for masking a 6x9 cm (AN) glass
negative carrier down to smaller sizes?  Beseler, in its infinite
wisdom, chooses not to ship their carriers with anything so useful.

Black photographic masking tape seems an obvious solution but that
would, most likely, permanently degrade the masked glass so I would
never be able to use a larger format.  I've considered cutting a
piece of mat board and taping it to the underside.

-Michael
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: Robert Drongowski <Robert.Drongowski@cc.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Infrared Photog + Spider Webs
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 12:47:29 EDT
Organization: Pediatric Surgery, U of Michigan
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1b2

Inrared Photog + Spider Webs
	Can anyone offer suggestions or their experience regarding
picture-taking of spider webs with Infrared film.  I have taken many web
pictures with both B&W and Color film with reasonable success.  However,
a small article in Science a few years back indicated that taking
pictures of webs with infrared film produces a unique glow within
portions of the web structure which mimics flower structures etc.  The
example they printed in the article was fairly neat, with one strand of
web highlighted from oputside to the very center of the web (which
presumably acts to attract insects etc).
	I subsequently shot a number of webs with no noticeable effect with the
film I used; ie. It looked like regular black and white film without any
effect of Infrared.  However, a few flowers that I shot did produce an
unusual effect which indicated to me that the film was "good".  I know
must one take extreme measures in handling the film (refrigerated,
absolutely no light while loading/unloading film, etc).
	Does anyone know if it's only certain spider-webs which produce this
result?  Are there any other tricks using infrared film which could
enhance my chances for success?
Could the developers have used a different method to enhance the effect?
Thanks for any suggestions, they are well appreciated.
BOB DRONGOWSKI,  Ann Arbor, Michigan
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: Problem: Green spots on negative
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:13:50 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.122103.14432@news.lrz-muenchen.de>, dranidis@informatik.uni-muenchen.de (Dimitris Dranidis) writes:
> frame but outside also (see sketch).
> 
> --------------oooooooooooooooooooooo--------------------
>  ==    ==    ==  ooooooooooooooooooooo   ==    ==     ==    
> -----------+  +----oooooooooooooooo----------+  +-------
>            |  |     ooooooooooooo            |  |
>            |  |         ooooo  |             |  |
>            |  |             |  |             |  |
> -----------+  +-------------+  +-------------+  +-------
>  ==    ==    ==    ==     ==    ==    ==    ==     ==    
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 

Sorry, problem is certainly contamination in processing.

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,alt.cd-rom,gnu.misc.discuss,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Time to boycott Photo CD
Date: 27 Aug 92 23:36:57 GMT
Article-I.D.: clark.1992Aug27.233657.8484
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA

In article <1992Aug27.142714.12321@edscom.demon.co.uk> rpt@edscom.demon.co.uk (Richard Tomlinson) writes:
>
>I agree with the sentiments, but isn't Kodak going for a totally different
>market? They are aiming at ordinary consumers who take snapshots and not PC
>users who want to use the images for DTP or whatever.

Why is that even an issue, there is a Photoshop plug-in in the works that
will allow you to just pull images off the Photo-CD.  Then with Photoshop
you could save them into whatever format you wanted.....and you still have
your high resolution unmodifed  original on the Photo-CD.

Gary
 
-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
From: falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photograping Whales [8008s autofocus problem]
Date: 1 Sep 1992 02:17:12 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine

In article <6031@transfer.stratus.com> savoia@sw.stratus.com (Rick Savoia) writes:
	[autofocus camera couldn't lock on breaching whales]

>Any ideas for next time?

Yeah, leave your autofocus camera at home and haul your old Argus C3
out of the closet.

Seriously; why do you need to be constantly changing the focus on
the fly?  Better to just set the camera to f8, figure out the hyperfocal
distance, set it and forget it.

		-ed falk, sun microsystems
		 sun!falk, falk@sun.com
	"Towards the end, the smell of their air began to change"