HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson)
Subject: Re: Printing-out papers
Organization: Mendelson Computer Consulting
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 22:43:10 GMT

shoppa@erin.caltech.edu (TIM SHOPPA) asks:

>	Most of my photo books have some reference to printing-out (contact
>printing) papers, but then quickly say that I don't want to use them and
>move on to the subject of enlarging papers.  The photo shops nearby don't
>normally stock Kodak printing-out papers, such as Velox or Azo, and the people
>who work there don't know anything about them.  I remember reading something
>in one of the Ansel Adams books about Weston nearly abandoning photography
>when platinum paper was discontinued, but then he discovered the wonderful
>properties of one of these Kodak papers.
>
>I have 3 questions:
>
>1.  Why do all my photo books tell me I don't want to use printing-out papers?
>
>B.  How would I actually use such a paper?  I don't see why I couldn't also
>use it for enlarging, if it can be used for contact printing.  I remember
>reading something about long exposure times with such papers, and something
>about not developing the paper, but just desensitizing the paper after
>exposure.
>
>III.  What qualities does a print made on printing-out paper have?  If
>Weston liked it, I might like it too.  But then it seems that hardly
>anyone else uses it.

To answer your questions in one fell swoop: They are a moot because Kodak
discontinued P.O.P last year. The amount of sales did not justify even
manufacturing it and keeping it in a freezer. :-(

I have never seen any P.O.P. from any other manufacturer, but it would not
hurt to give Agfa or Ilford a call. Perhaps a net.person in Germany or the
U.K. might know of some.

The P.O.P work differently than most sensative material as you could print
the pictures without any chemicals or equipment. They would turn a deep
purple color by exposure to ultra violet or sunlight. As they aged they
would continue to expose, so they were ephemeral.

I don't know about desensitizing them, but you could develop and fix them 
if you wish.


Geoff.
-- 
Copyright (C) 1992, Geoffrey S. Mendelson.              All Rights Reserved.
Except for usenet followups, may not be reproduced without permsission. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                   |  Computer Software Consulting    |                   |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geoffrey S. Mendelson                    Israel
geoffrey@mendelson.com                          or
mwcbbs!mailgsm!geoffrey                            Bust!
(215) 242-8712                          Looks like August now :-(
From: jmb5b@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (John M. Bozeman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: mechanical cameras
Date: 12 Apr 92 10:08:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: murdoch.1992Apr12.100802.28060
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Virginia


A write-up on the Russian made Cambron 12XP (35mm), Cambron 60TTL (2 1/4),
and Kiev 88 (2 1/4) cameras is found on pp32-5, 50 in Feb. 1992 Popular 
Photography.  

            John
From: dlow@pollux.svale.hp.com (Danny Low)
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:52:18 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for  you!)
Organization: Hewlett Packard CPCD, Sunnyvale CA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

>(Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona) 
>On the other hand, Playboy will have to show how they suffered losses
>through "illegal" distributions of pictures.

Not in this case. When there is a specific instant by a specific
person of a specific copyrighted photo, no monetary damage need
be shown. It is only when there is generality as in the Universal
Pictures and Disney suit against Sony does monetary damage have to be 
proven. In that case, NO specific violation was presented.

			   Danny Low
    "Question Authority and the Authorities will question You"
	   Valley of Hearts Delight, Silicon Valley
	     HP NPCD   dlow@pollux.svale.hp.com
From: wangj@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: NikonFE2,Lenses,Flash for Sale
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:11:10 GMT

Hi, there!
Following items are for sale:

Nikon FE2 chrome                      $330

Nikon Series E 50mm/1.8               $30

Nikon CF-27 case for above            $10

Vivitar Series 1 zoom 28-90/2.8-3.5   $95

Sunpak 344D flash                     $50
  * Dedicated for Nikon or Pentax
  * Zoom 35/50/135mm
  * Bounce, vertical and horizontal
  * Guide number: 86@35mm
  * Made in Japan

Long nose camera case                  $5

Everything is in brand new condition with box, manual etc.   Less than 3 rolls 
of films have been through the body.  The flash and the zoom lens have 
never been used except for testing their functions.  Please send to this 
account if you are interested.    Jin
From: jacobs@cerritos.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Day for night/ night photography
Date: 9 Apr 92 01:24:38 GMT
Organization: Cerritos College, Norwalk CA

In article <ku69f5INNhn9@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM>, kabir@kabir.Eng.Sun.COM (Ihtisham Kabir) writes:
> I heard someone mention the application of "day for night",
> a technique used in movies, to night photography. Apparently
> the result is that one gets photographs that look almost
> like they were exposed during the day, but have a strange
> look to them. Michael Kenna apparently uses this technique.
> 
> Does anyone know what I am talking about, or was I hallucinating? :-)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> - Ihtisham Kabir

	One of the common techniques in old movies was to shoot with a red or
orange filter on the lens to darken the sky and then underexpose the film to
achieve the "nighttime" look while shooting during the day. There are other
techniques as well , perhaps someone else out there knows them?

karl
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sleo@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Suwandi Leo)
Subject: Used Nikon F4s for sale
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Distribution: ny
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 05:59:32 EDT

I am selling my Nikon F4s.  It is about 8 months old.
Used very little (reason for selling).  The F4s is really
not what I need, it is too much for me.  I am looking to
buy an 8008s instead.
Price: $1200 or best offer
Condition: Almost new (less than 15 rolls shot)

Contact: sleo@mailbox.syr.edu

Suwandi Leo
60 Presidential Plaza #1409
Syracuse, NY 13202
(315)475-6973
From: gdw@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (gordon.d.woods)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Some arcane questions
Date: 9 Apr 92 14:02:39 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories

From article <1992Apr9.093638.19029@colorado.edu>, by duli@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Li Du):
> In article <12042@> byron@archone.tamu.edu (Byron Rakitzis) writes:
>>Does anyone know a way to find out whether the optical formula of an AF
>>lens is the same as that of the corresponding MF lens?
>>Finally, how about "classics" like the 105/2.5? This must be one of
>>Nikon's all-time best lenses. Is it going to be produced in an AF
>>version?
> 	I don't think so, becasue it requires relatively large extension
> 	and all five lens-elements(not a small mass) move when focusing,
> 	therefore AF speed will be slow and the gain over the MF version
> 	will be minimal. Nikon is still making the MF 105/2.5 and I think
> 	they will continue the production as long as there is a profitable
> 	market for it.
I was under the impression that the optical design of many
lenses changes over the years and that the 105/2.5 was no
exception. Therefore, an old mechanical 105/2.5 would be different
from a newer, also mechanical, 105/2.5. So when one refers
to "the classic 105/2.5", it is an illusion because there is no
single 105/2.5 design. Perhaps one of the specific designs is
considered a classic but people don't tend to refer to them that way.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ong@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONG ENG TENG)
Subject: Re: Choosing a tele zoom
Organization: Oklahoma State University
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 00:22:08 GMT

From article <1595@devnull.mpd.tandem.com>, by subra@kaki.uucp (S Subramaniam):
> Hello all,
> 
> I am planning to buy a telephoto, 70-210 or 80-200 or 100-300 range 
> for the Nikon FM2. I am aware that recently the same discussion was 

I really like the Nikkor 80-200/2.8 ED AF for it mechanics.  Even as a
AF lens, you can do single-action (same ring for zooming and focusing).
The one I just bought (new) has a MF/AF lock.  When in AF, the ring is
disengaged from the focusing mechanism so that if you rotate it, it
does not affact the focusing (focusing is controlled by the camera).
But if you switch it to MF, then the ring is locked onto the focusing
mechanism so that you do single-action.  It acts completely like a
manual focus lens when in MF.  Of course, you pay high dollar ($800 new)
for it.  Wonder if other AF zooms are like that (this is my first zoom
since my high school days when I had a cheapo Sigma 70-210/3.5).
From: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: B&W Contact Prints
Date: 7 Apr 92 06:20:32 GMT
Reply-To: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Distribution: na
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA


In article <1992Apr6.204258.27155@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>,
gle@l42bb.jsc.nasa.gov (glenn ellis) writes:
|> Anyone have a cleaver suggestions on how to make bw contact prints without 
|> an enlarger.  I've heard of some methods using picture frame glass and a 
|> flash, does this work.  any suggestions?

Well, Edward Weston was considered by many people to be a reasonably
good artist, and he apparently made prints with a light bulb suspended
over a contact printing frame.

You know they used to light enlargers with sunlight, through a little
hole in the wall, and mirrors, and that sort of thing?  Sort of cramps
your style when a cloud comes over the "bulb."

An enlarger as a light source for contact printing is a bit of an overkill,
but it's convenient.

My suggestion is to just go for it!  Don't be afraid to try out a few
things.  How about a slide projector with a short lens?  (ANY cheap,
short lens.  Fasten it in with duct tape if you have to.  About 50mm
should do fine.)  *Make* a light source -- can't be that hard!  You'd
like it reasonably even.

- donl mathis at Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
donl@sgi.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo,can.general,misc.legal
From: lavoie@bnr.ca (Marc Lavoie)
Subject: Re: What is required to sell pictures?
Reply-To: lavoie@bnr.ca (Marc Lavoie)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 92 14:49:44 GMT

In article <10417@ncrcan.Canada.NCR.CA>, tnelson@ncrcan.Canada.NCR.CA (Tim Nelson) writes:
|> I want to start a small business selling some of my hobby photos, but
|> I wonder what the legal restrictions would be in selling pictures with
|> other people in them.
|> 
|> I have many pictures with identifiable faces, so I would like to know
|> if there are restrictions on selling a picture of someone else.
|> 
|> Generally is it a good idea to get a waiver before hand, and if so,
|> does anyone have a generic copy they could send me? (by email?)
|> 
|> I am in Canada, so perhaps someone can also give pointers on legal
|> restrictions which are Canadian specific.
|> 
|> Any recommendations you could provide would be greatly appreciated.
|> 
|> thanx
|> tim
|> -- 
|> Tim.Nelson@Canada.NCR.COM
|> NCR Canada +1 416 819 4112

Tim,

As far as I know, if there are people in your photos, you must have
them sign a release form stating clearly what the picture will be used
for.  For example, "can be used in a photo contest", "can be sold",
"I give up any rights to the picture", "can be sold but xx% must be paid
to the subject"...

The only case where this does not apply is for pictures where people are
not recognizable (too fuzzy, too far...) or if the pictures were taken
at an open event, demonstration... as long as people just happen to be there
(in other words, I don't think you can click pictures of one person all day).
This is the exception that allows television station to broadcast footage
of events without getting a release from everybody.

Hope some legal type can enlighten us a bit more.

Marc Lavoie
Bell-Northern Research
Ottawa, Ontario
lavoie@bnr.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rnewell@sol.UVic.CA (GQ-guy)
Subject: question
Summary: asa is what?
Keywords: tech pan film
Organization: University of Victoria
Distribution: na
Date: 13 Apr 92 22:46:01 GMT

What is the ASA rating of Kodak Technical Pan Film ?

And what Black & White films are out there other than The T-max
series for  120 Roll Film and 35mm.

I use ton's of t-max  100ASA and 400ASA in my Rollei 3.5F Planar
with very satisfying results and am wondering what other options
there are.

Colin
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: BOLEX MOVIE CAMERA FOR SALE!!!!
From: mertes@vax.sonoma.edu
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:18:13 -0800
Organization: Sonoma State University
Summary: MOVIE CAMERA FOR SALE

	FOR SALE:::::--------> MOVIE CAMERAS<-------------
 
----------------->BOLEX 16mm camera, has 18-86mm, and 16mm lenses!
----------------->Leather case, and filters, excellent condition!
----------------->BELL HOWELL 16mm SOUND Projector!



please email to this address!

mertes@sonoma.edu

THANX
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sprinkle@convex.com (Robert Sprinkle)
Subject: OM-PC Problem
Summary: OM-PC Problems
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 20:03:07 GMT
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.

I have owned an Olympus OM-PC for several years now and have been very
pleased.  However I am now having a very frustrating problem.  I can put
in a fresh set of batteries and attempt to take a shot and the shutter
locks up and the "fresh" batteries are drained.  I have taken it to a
local (Dallas) camera store for repairs.  They kept it for 4 weeks.  Upon
the return of the camera at the store I put in new batteries and it seemed
to work fine.  The repair people said they coould find no problem with the 
camera.  As usual soon as I left the store and tried to use the camera the
same thing happened.  I tried another set of batteries to no avail.  Using
this trial and error method gets expensive 'cause batteries aint cheap.
I would like to stay with Olympus because of the accesories I have
accumulated over the years.  I refuse to buy ANY of this autofocus crap
on the market today.
Anyone outthere had similar problems?  Any suggestions.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: "Phaedrus 'n Co." <sl291006@silver.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: Photo finishing equipment
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 15:57:22 -0500

In article <70236@ut-emx.uucp> schin@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (neil schier) writes:
>Hello
>A friend of mine wishes to start a photo finishing business in Russia.
>Do you know where , in the US or elsewhere, he could pick up one of those
>big photofinishing units.
>Thanks in advance
>Neil
>.

Many manufactures have Equiipment..... Kodak, Agfa, and a few others.. but the best equipment from what I have seen is from Nortisu. Tlak to your local One hour lab about where they got their equipment. They will be able to tell ya who to contact.

Mike Kavka
From: nareid@imf.unit.no (Helge Nareid)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Uniformity of development -- how good?
Date: 12 Apr 92 19:26:19 GMT
Organization: The Norwegian Institute of Technology, Trondheim

In article <1992Apr9.172153.13560@research.nj.nec.com> dan@research.nj.nec.com (Dan Ruderman) writes:
>	Has anyone experimented with b&w films to test large-scale
>	processing uniformity?  I will be using 120 film and 
>	tank processing.  Does it help to use a more dilute developer
>	for a longer time?  Is a density fluctuation of .01 considered
>	good or bad?
>
>
>	Thanks,
>	Dan Ruderman
>	dan@research.nj.nec.com

My experiments aren't all that extensive, but I've had a few problems with
uneven development in my time, and I've gained some experiments in coping
with it.

The best remedy, in my opinion, is to use a pre-whetting bath. I use an
extremely dilute solution of Photo-Flo (1:1000 in distilled or de-ionized
water is a good starting point) for about half a minute (not critical). It
is important that there is no foam formation in the Photo-Flo solution.

Using a strongly diluted developer is a bad idea in my experience. This
will lead to local developer exhaustion in heavily exposed areas, which
can easily result in streaking in the processed image. It can also lead
to problems with adjacent areas of different density.

It is also important to insure good developer circulation to all parts 
of the emulsion, preferably in a random manner (no fixed circulation
patterns).

And yes, I would consider a max. variation of .01 to be extremely good,
a fluctuation of 0.1 would be nigh on unacceptable.



--
Helge Nareid                             E-mail :    nareid@phys.unit.no
SINTEF Applied Physics                   Phone  :    + 47 - 7 - 59 34 18
Trondheim, Norway                        Fax    :    + 47 - 7 - 59 34 20
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Anyone have ANY Comments about the SIGMA 400mm f5.6 APO Lense?????
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:59:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewsm.1992Apr9.165900.22483
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

I e-mailed a response to the original posting, but it might be of general
interest to note that Pop. Photog. just tested this lens and found it to
be f6.2, not f5.6 at full aperture. I wonder if they got a bad one, or if
this is true for all of them. I know its only 1/3 stop, but would you buy
one if it were a Sigma 400/6.2 rather than a Sigma 400/5.6 ??

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jchen@ftrooper.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Jason Chen)
Subject: Re: Sigma's Zen finish
Reply-To: jchen@ctt.bellcore.com
Organization: Bell Communications Research
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 18:42:03 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.010553.6472@walter.bellcore.com>, jchen@flash.bellcore.com (Jason Chen) writes:

|> I admit that I have NOT seen or felt the Zen finish yet. But I assume if Sigma
                      ^^^^^
|> spends so much money to market it, there should be some merits to it.
|> 

Sorry for the missing key word. 

-- 

C. Jason Chen                 
**************E-Mail: jchen@ctt.bellcore.com
**************V-Mail: (908)699-6993
**************P-Mail: 444 Hoes Lane, 1E229, Piscataway, NJ
From: lytle@noao.edu (Dyer Lytle  CCS)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: hand-coloring B&W prints
Date: 7 Apr 92 05:09:46 GMT
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA




Greetings,

The latest chapter in my quest to express myself and learn all about
photography is about hand-coloring (hand-tinting) black and white prints.
I had been wanting to try this ever since I saw some work a friend of
had done last year.

I read a couple of articles about this practice and decided to try what
seemed to me the least messy approach which is to use colored oil pencils.
(Marshall's)  I have so far colored parts of four 11x14 prints and I think
the results are quite striking.

For those of you who haven't tried this, the basic procedure is:

 1. Select a photograph that you think would make a good hand-colored
    print.  Print it a little lighter than usual on fiber-based matt
    finish paper.

 2. The print needs to be held flat while you are working on it.  I have
    tried both holding the print flat in my 11x14 speed-ez-el and dry
    mounting it.  I prefer to have it dry mounted on a fairly stiff backing.

 3. The surface of the print is coated with a clear oily liquid called
    p.m. solution (just vegetable oil and turpentine).  This prepares
    the surface for the pencils and has the effect of increasing the
    contrast of the matt surface (blacks get quite a bit blacker).
    This solution is applied with a cotton ball.

 4. The colored pencils are then applied to various areas of the picture
    and the pencil strokes are smeared to a uniform density using
    cotton swabs.  I use Q-tips and also wrap cotton balls around a
    sharply pointed stick that came with the pencil set I bought
    (for smaller areas).

 5. The oil stays wet enough to work with for about 24 hours so the
    coloring can be done in more than one session.  The print is quite
    dry after about 3 days.  While the print is wet, color can be
    removed with a cotton ball wet with p.m. solution.

So far my subjects have been rather static (a vase of flowers, a shelf
full of very old bottles, a bedpan sitting on a clay pot that had been
painted green.) but there is no reason not to color more dynamic subjects.

I am planning to build a stereo pinhole camera and may try coloring some
of the resulting images.  Also, I think that in certain situations it
might be interesting to color an object and color the object's shadow
with another shade.  Or perhaps blue shadows....

My friend did a series of photographs around town each with an American
flag in the photo (school classroom, fire station, court house, etc.)
and just hand-colored the flag in each photograph.  The results were
quite good.

So, any other people out there hand coloring their photographs?  Have
you tried the oil colors in tubes?  What are the advantages/disadvantages?

 -Dyer Lytle


-- 
Dyer Lytle, National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, 602-323-4136
Internet: lytle@noao.edu        SPAN: NOAO::LYTLE (NOAO=5355)
From: michael@sequent.com (Michael Squires)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Hawaii location tips??
Date: 7 Apr 92 17:57:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Apr7.175708.25876
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.

My wife is visiting the island of Hawaii ("the big island") next week
for about a week. She's staying on the Kona coast but will be driving
all over. She's particularly into landscapes, but architecture and
street scenes are interesting as well. (She's also into weaving,
needlepoint, quilting so if you have suggestions along those lines
they'd be welcome too.) Any suggestions for locations, events, etc?

					Thanks,
					Michael Squires
From: dlow@pollux.svale.hp.com (Danny Low)
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1992 22:02:58 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for  you!)
Organization: Hewlett Packard CPCD, Sunnyvale CA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

>(Bob J Taylor) 
>A Japenese group (person?) bought Pebble Beach in Monterey, CA.  Pebble
>Beach's copyrighted symbol (i.e.  letterhead material) is a drawn
>sillouette of the lone cypress.  This is a famous and well photographed
>tree on 17 mile drive.  If a simple "tourist" (instamatic, Kodak-in-a-box)
>etc... take a picture nothing happens.  However, if anyone with a tripod
>or other equipment making them look half way professional stops to set up
>a security guard will come out and order them to move on.  They claim
>that no one can display or sell pictures (and presumably any
>representations of the tree) because they hold the copyright.  This is
>even though the tree was there long before people were.  

This Japanese group recently sold Pebble Beach to another Japanese
group at a BIG lost. Basically the original group of Japanese were
very stupid and overpaid for PB and then tried to recovered their
investment with some stupid tactics. Preventing "pro" photogs
from photographing the tree was not only stupid but contrary to
copyright law. If they had kept up such harassment, they would 
have eventually gotten some one riled enough to actually bring the case
to court and they would have lost.

			   Danny Low
    "Question Authority and the Authorities will question You"
	   Valley of Hearts Delight, Silicon Valley
	     HP NPCD   dlow@pollux.svale.hp.com