HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wave@waits.media.mit.edu (Michael B. Johnson)
Subject: Re: 9xi Re-Visited
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:40:18 GMT

Russell Williams writes
> I've been very happy with the 9xi, but I've also found only a small 
> difference in AF performance between the 9xi (or 7xi) and my old
> 7000i. I've used the same lenses on all my Maxxum cameras, and assumed
> that the minimal improvement was because the newer bodies are optimized
> to take advantage of newer lenses with faster AF gearing.
> 
> I learned to use AF with a 9000, which has
> only a single central sensor. I find the large area, multi-sensor
> xi cameras sometimes focus on unexpected things, and have switched
> (at least temporarily) to using only the central AF sensor most of
> the time. 
> 
> I bought the camera as an updated 9000 -- it combines updated AF
> performance and auto fill flash with ruggedness, DOF preview, 
> PC connection, on-demand spot metering. I don't tend to use the
> focus tracking, 4.5 fps motor, program mode, or 1/12000 shutter. 
> I tend to work mostly in aperture priority, with slow film, 
> usually with a chest brace or tripod and cable release. The camera 
> has lived up to my expectations.
> 

I'm in exactly the same position, and, with a few reservations, like the 9xi a  
lot better than my 9000.  It's lighter, focuses faster, and basically does what  
I want.  Since I do a lot of long (30 seconds, a few minutes) exposures, the  
two things I miss are the fact that on the 9000, there was a built in eye-piece  
cover you engaged with a little switch in the back - on the 9xi, you're  
expected to take the eye-piece cover off and slide a different cover on.  It's  
not the work I mind, it's the fact that I'll lose them...  The other is that I  
use the self timer a lot, mainly in lieu of a RC cord.  Since you have to open  
the body up, and press a button, which only lasts for one exposure, it's  
nowhere near as nice as the switch on the 9000 that stayed there until you  
flipped it back.  Those things aside, the 9xi is a great camera, and a worthy  
successor to the 9000.



--

-->  Michael B. Johnson
-->  MIT Media Lab      --  Computer Graphics & Animation Group
-->  (617) 253-0663     --  wave@media-lab.media.mit.edu
-->  NeXT Mail accepted at  wave@nordine.media.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: dean@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz (Dean Ashby)
Subject: Depth of field equations
Organization: Computer Science Department, University of Canterbury
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 02:55:02 GMT

I've obtained the following formulas for calculating the depth of field of
a lense, given the aperture, and point of focus.  I am a bit skeptical 
about the equation for the far limit of dof.  Here are the equations -

H = hyperfocal distance
F = focal length of lense
f = f stop
u = focused point

a) Calculate hyperfocal disance

                          F^2
		  H =  ---------
		       f x 0.033


b) Near limit of field

                         H x u
                   =  -----------
                      H + (u - F)


c) Far limit of field

                         H x u
                      =  -----
                         H - F


All values should be in millimeters (except fstop).  Equation c) doesn't
produce sensible values for the far limit.  Can anyone tell me what is
wrong here?  Much appreciated,

Dean
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tonyp@cs.umr.edu (Tony Phillips)
Subject: Incredible blue sky
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:13:41 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla
Originator: tonyp@mcs213e.cs.umr.edu

For those of you who read Popular Photography, look in the newest issue
at the Kodak Ektar awards.  There is a beautiful picture of some hot-air
balloons rising over a lake.  Notice the blue sky.

My question is, how in the world did the photographer get the sky to be that
dark, yet the balloons to be so bright?  I would guess the photographer wasn't
using a ND grad filter because the balloons aren't darkened.  I've also heard
that a polarizing filter helps darken the sky, but I havn't ever acheived 
that startling of a result.

Any insights would be greatly appreciated.


-- 
|  Tony Phillips-  University of Missouri CS Dept.  |  Programming: A noun   |
|                                                   |  meaning 'The Art of   |
|  Reply to:  tonyp@cs.umr.edu                      |  debugging a blank     |
|  Prefered Address:  S102066@UMRVMA.UMR.EDU        |  sheet of paper'       |
From: sog@craycos.com (Steve Gombosi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Did this group split while I was gone?
Date: 7 Nov 92 18:24:30 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

In article <1035@ubbpc.tredydev.Unisys.COM> kjm@ubbpc.tredydev.Unisys.COM (Ken J. McFadden) writes:
>Way back when I lost my new feed in August, the majority of readers
>seemed to want to keep a single group.  But now that I'm back I
>noticed rec.photo and rec.photography.  What's the purpose of the
>2 groups, cause it ain't obvious by their names.

There's no such group as "rec.photography" at this site (Cray Computer 
Corporation [craycos.com]) - perhaps your administrator made an error
in setting up your /usr/spool/news heirarchy? Anybody else seen this
newsgroup?
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Which projector is quietest?
Date: 13 Nov 92 23:36:07 GMT
Distribution: rec.photo
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

I am especially looking for a *quiet* projector.  I would even 
sacrifice some automatic features in exchange for a projector
that didn't fill the room with noise from its fan.  

Anyone have suggestions?

Gerry Palo (73237.2006@compuserve.com)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: gsm@gsm001.mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson)
Subject: Re: Need info on 16mm film for miniature cameras
Organization: Mendelson.com
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:48:08 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.175201.24931@cunews.carleton.ca> ioannis@cygnus.sce.carleton.ca (Ioannis Lambadaris) writes:

>Since these cameras use 16mm film I was wondering if I can spool
>16mm black and white negative movie film assuming that I can
>find reloadable cassetes. Any of the netters can provide his opinion
>on this ? Is negative movie B&W film suitable for such a purpose? 
>Is the development the same as for an ordinary 35mm B&W film?
>

Yes, when I was a teenager these cameras were the very popular among my
friends. We used to buy outdated 16mm black and white movie film and
stick it in the cartriages. 100 feet seemed to last forever.

Since movie film is usally put through a reversal process it is not rated
at the same speed as the equivalent still film. The best thing to do is to
try a few shots at different film speeds and see what you get.

One of the early models of the Minolta 16 was fixed focus and never quite
got anything sharp. The manual (usually zone) focus ones were fine.

Geoff.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: briang@atlastele.com (Brian Godfrey)
Subject: Re: 120 roll film still used ??
Summary: yup
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:07:20 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.134257.10473@alf.uib.no> edmtl@alf.uib.no (Thor Legvold) writes:
>For projection, Rollei, Reflecta, Hasselblad, and others make 6x6
>projectors which accept slides in 7x7 frames (3mm thick) - i.e.
>6x6 and 6x4.5.  I don't know if 6x7 projectors exist, although I
>would imagine they must.

   Mamiya markets two 6X7 projectors.  You can project mounted or unmounted
   slides.

>Do you really want _all_ your slides mounted???  Are they _that_ good...?

   Nobody's are.  That's probably why labs don't usually offer mounting by
   the roll.  If you take your slides in and ask them to mount them, most
   labs will be happy to do it.

>I wonder if it would be cost effective to buy a 220 back and start
>using 220 film, since developing costs the same no matter film
>type or length.  I'm planning a tour to Egypt for New Years, and
>expect to take 40 or 50 rolls of Velvia with me.  If I shot 220
>that would be half the cost of developing afterwords...

   I don't remember seeing Velvia in 220.  As far as I recall, Kodak only
   offers a couple of emulsions in 220.  Not sure about Fuji.  It will
   certainly be much harder to find.  I think I'd have 220 backs if I were a
   wedding or studio portrait photographer, but not otherwise.  (My
   opinions.)

--Brian M. Godfrey
  atlastele.com

-- 
--Brian M. Godfrey
  atlastele.com
From: dollbes@ucbeh.san.uc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: SLIDE DUPLICATOR HELP PLEASE
Date: 13 Nov 92 20:41:38 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati

SLIDE DUPLICATION HELP

I recently got a simple 1:1 slide duplicator to duplicate some slides (mainly
on Kodakchrome). I do not know what light source to use, what settings for the
camera or which kind of film.
Any tip or help will be greatly appriciated

Shaul

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sfysh@epas.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Moskal Fysh)
Subject: Re: photomanipulation
Organization: University of Toronto - EPAS
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:27:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.155355.32550@news.th-darmstadt.de> D98O@BR1.HRZ.TH-DARMSTADT.DE (Jochen Fuehrer) writes:
>
>In <1992Nov11.204928.23850@adobe.com> usenet@adobe.com writes:
>
>> | I am looking for specific examples of photographs that have been
>> | manipulated and used as a picture of reality.
>> 
>> 				-Heather
>> 
>> The very best examples of this kind of work have probably passed
>> right under our noses without being detected. People who alter
>> photographic images in order to pass them off as *unaltered* do 
>> not attach warning labels to their handiwork!
>> 
>> 				-Alan
>
>I have seen a famous example in a foto magazine (don't remember which or
>when). It shows Lenin and his men without Trotzki, but he actually was
>on the original picture. They simply put another face over his. The fake
>was in every soviet history book, the original picture also still exists
>in western archieves. 
>I just remember, it was in Popular Photography around 12/91.
>-- Jochen
>

My parents have a family picture that never happened.  It was
originally three photos - 6 family members in Northern Ontario, 1
family member who never left the Ukraine, and a string of pearls that
said family member forgot to wear for the picture.  It was taken in
the late 1920s, I think.

Stephanie Fysh
Univ. of Toronto
(sfysh@epas.utoronto.ca)
From: marc@milan.East.Sun.COM (Marc Thompson-Sun-Vienna VA-Systems Engineer)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Reliable Strobe System (Speedotron,Dyn
Date: 12 Nov 1992 22:06:13 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: marc@milan.East.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: milan.east.sun.com

In article 1068@netcom.com, alix@netcom.com (Alexandria North) writes:
>I also a White Lightning Ultra 600 as well (which is supposedly equivalent 
>to 600 w/s, not 300!), and I think you need to qualify "plenty of light."
>
>Alexandria

Thanks for the wonderful responses, it seems that for budget minded people like me
several people favor the White Lightning systems. Based on the above verbage,
maybe the Ultra 1200 will be adequate....

Thanks Again...

Marc .....  

Organization: Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentatn, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
From: HO@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu (Francis Ho)
Subject: MAXXUM 70-210 mm Lens (Repost)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 03:58:31 GMT

MINOLTA MAXXUM AF Lens (for non-i's)

70-210 mm (f3.5-4.5)
multicoated
like new (less than a year old)
under warranty

$150 plus s/h, firm.

ho@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu
From: bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Stained Negatives?
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:16:37 GMT
Reply-To: bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

donl mathis writes:

>In article <1992Nov9.154820.29694@bcrka451.bnr.ca>, poole@bnr.ca (Thomas
>Poole) writes:
>
>|> Can anyone tell me what these stains are?
>|> 
>|> I used Ilford 400 Delta 35mm film, developed for 8 min in Ilford
>|> developer, 30 seconds in the stop bath (instructions called
>|> for 10 seconds) and 1 minute in the Ilford Paper Fixer (guy
>|> at the store said Paper fixer would work fine for film).
>
> [discussion of fixing time/dilution omitted ]

>In any case, I can't imagine 1 minute being
>enough time for any film, in any fixer, 

Weeeeeell.  I've found that 1 minute with constant agitation in Ilford Rapid 
is perfectly adequate for Kodak Pan Masking Film.  (It clears in 1/2 minute.)
Sorry - couldn't resist bringing in utterly irrelevent (to say nothing of
irreverent) esoterica.  :-)  

Barry


--


|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Barry Sherman, Amdahl Corp.  | PROGRAM: n. A magic spell cast over a com-  |
| bjs@ruts.ccc.amdahl.com      | puter allowing it to turn one's input into  |
|                              | error messages.  tr.v. To engage in a pas-  |
|                              | time similar to banging one's head against  |
|                              | a wall, but with fewer opportunities for    |
|                              | reward.                                     |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Amdahl, being a corporation, is a legal fiction.  Therefore it is incapable|
| of holding, let alone expressing, opinions.  Unfortunately, this has been  |
| said of me as well.                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Subject: Re: The color developer in the E-6 process
Reply-To: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:20:06 GMT


In article <1992Nov9.083257.12221@sys.sweden.dg.com>,
robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson) writes:
|> I have a question regarding the color developer step in the E-6 process.
|> Namely, what happens if the processing time in the color developer is too
|> short? Too long? The instructions are quite clear on what the result will
|> be when the time is too short or too long in the first developer or the
|> bleach-fix, but it doesn't mention anything like that for the color
|> developer.
|> 
|> Note that I'm currently using a 3 step kit intended for professional use,
|> not a 6 step kit.

Three steps?  That must mean that the reversal bath is stuck in with
the color developer in step 2.

The first step really is the most critical.  In a sense, all of the
decisions about what the results will look like are made in that bath:
the overall contrast, maximum and minimum densities, speed, and that
sort of thing.

The remaining steps more or less run to completion; once the job is
done, it's done, but it isn't going to change anything to run it a bit
longer.  The reversal bath is going to reverse all of the available,
unexposed silver salts, and once that's done, it will just slosh around
in there without hurting anything.  Similarly, the color developer will
develop the reversed silver salts, and form the dyes, and once that's
done, there's nothing more to do, so it will just slosh around in there
without having much effect.

The next step, which is likely bleach/fix, will bleach the developed
silver back into silver salts, and once that's done, the bleach will
just slosh around in there.  The fixer will collect all of those silver
salts, and once that's done, it will just slosh around in there.

Wash thoroughly, but once the film is washed, the water will just slosh
around in there without doing much.

The time suggested in the instructions probably has enough of a safety
factor in it that you wouldn't normally get in trouble with
underprocessing, and since overprocessing is not really that big of a
problem, you just don't have to worry about it much.

- donl mathis at Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
donl@sgi.com
From: lrandall@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU (Laura Randall)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: REPOST: Pentax 645
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:46:10 GMT
Reply-To: lrandall@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: oavax.csuchico.edu

FOR SALE:		Pentax 645 PRO Camera System

		Includes:
			(1) Pentax 645 PRO Camera back with power winder
			(2) 120 film backs
			(1) SMC Pentax-A F2.8 55mm lens
			(1) SMC Pentax-A F2.8 75mm lens
			(1) SMC Pentax-A F3.5 150mm lens
			(1) Pentax AF280T Dedicated Flash unit

			cases for lenses and flash unit

		Camera system is in excellent condition

		Price:  $1800 or best offer

*****	Please note: This system is offered as a unit. No inidividual
		     items will be sold separately

	reply email	lrandall@oavax.csuchico.edu
	      phone	(916) 894-1251    ask for Brad
From: tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Enlarger tips wanted
Date: 12 Nov 92 03:16:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: ra.BxL2Fn.JCD
Organization: Naval Research Lab, Washington, DC

In article <7bWW02z12arH01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman) writes:
>Oh donl, donl, donl.  I thought better of you than to attempt to mis-lead
>the trusting readers of rec.photo in this way.  Implying that the grossly
>out-moded aluminum enlarger tips are "the newer style".  Surely you must know 
>that carbon-fiber bodied, fuzzy-logic driven, auto-zooming enlarger tips have
>completely superceded those other outmoded dinosaurs.  Why, rather than
>charging people for the shipping, you should be *paying* them to accept your
>old cast-iron enalrger tips.  Forsooth!
>
>:-)

	Na, I saw this really neat Besseler in the store today, kinda of the
poor man (relatively speaking) version of the Kodak Create-a-Print
machine.  Got this little gadget hooked up to where the enlarging lens
used to be, and a piece of wire going into this box with lots of knobs,
and a piece of wire coming out of the box into a color monitor.  I
wonder is there a slot for PhotoCD.  Christmas is not too far away,
maybe Clinton will give us all a $20,000 tax break......

-Anthony
From: zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Blown it again
Date: 11 Nov 92 14:53:34 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre

Well after asking for advice on photographing jugglers back in April, I had 
a chance to try it out last Saturday, and I blew it AGAIN.  Overexposure of 
all the on-stage stuff.  some of the rest isn't too bad.  Oh well, it's only 
money.


        Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty

  Dave Budd, MCC, Oxford Rd, Manchester, England   (44|0)61-275-6033  
  D.Budd@mcc.ac.uk                                          fax 6040
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: shendry@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Slamet Hendry)
Subject: Comment on Beattie's Intenscreen?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 06:59:10 GMT

Can anybody who has ever used Intenscreen post a comment or two please.
(Posting is probably better, since many may benefit from your posting.)

1. What does it actually do? Does it make viewing thru slow lens feel
   like viewing thru a faster lens, say f/4 becomes f/1.8?
2. If so, does it alter the meter?
3. Is it effective only when there is little light, or uniformly?
4. Is it worth the money (around US$65, I believe)?

My camera is Nikon FM2. Thank's in advance.

- Slamet Hendry
  (shendry@silver.ucs.indiana.edu)
From: thull@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Scott Thull)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:44:40 GMT
Subject: Re: Reliable Strobe System (Speedotron,DynaLite, etc) ?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
From: Christian Brudevoll <chribrud@ifi.uio.no>
Subject: YASHIKA LYNX-1000 (Anybody had experience with it?)
Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:00:42 GMT
Originator: chribrud@gyda.ifi.uio.no

I have got a YASHIKA LYNX-1000, and wonders if anybody 
have had any experience with it.
It has a 4.5cm F1.8 objective with central shutter, hence
blitz-synchronization on all times from B,1 to 1/1000s.
The shutter goes a little too fast on 1s, about 0.9s.

Will it be simple to adjust the shutter?

How to test the shutter on higher speeds?

The light-meter is to little sensitive. Set to 800 asa,
which is maximum, it's like about 125 asa on my SLR's.

Is it hard to adjust such light-meter?
(Might it be the battery? - what battery?)



			    	Christian Brudevoll
                                University of Oslo
                                Norway
From: norton@pepper.rutgers.edu (Steven W. Norton)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Used Kodak Slide Clip Sets for Sale
Keywords: sale
Date: 13 Nov 92 13:52:32 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


I'm posting this for a friend.  Please do not respond to this newsgroup
or by EMail.  


For sale:  Used Kodak slide clip sets (# 150 2038) for use with Kodak
Carousel stack loader (# 151 4249).  Excellent condition.  Each set
holds a maximum of 432 35-mm slides in the same size box as a Carousel
slide tray.  New sets sell for $45-$50.  Will sell for $11/set, postage
included.  20 sets are available.  Send check to Michael J. Hudak, 
38 Oliver St., Binghamton, NY  13904.  For more information write, or
call 607/723-5769.
From: reuel@blivet.houst.sgi.com (Reuel Nash)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: How much to charge for print?
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:50:21 GMT
Reply-To: reuel@sgi.com
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: blivet.houst.sgi.com


I've had one of my prints on display in a building at Rice University
and someone wants to buy a copy of it. I have no experience in the
trade of prints and would like some advice. Maybe someone who spends
more time in photo galleries than I do could help.

This print is an 11x14" color print made from a 120 negative. I printed
it myself at Rice (i.e. it's a "custom" print, not a "machine" print).

How much should I ask?

What price is usually asked for a "good" print from a previously
unpublished photographer?

I'm not (and don't plan to be) in the business of selling my prints as
a livelihood.

I'd like to think that selling this could cover some of my costs.  I
paid $300 to use the Rice darkroom that summer.  I would have to pay
that again to "duplicate" the print if the person wants it to be
printed by ME. Or, if she wants to by the print that's there, I'd have
to pay that again to get one for me.  There's about $100 worth of
matting, glass, and frame.  It would cost $17 to have a "custom" print
made at a local lab.

--
Reuel Nash	(713)293-9292	FAX (713)293-0503
Silicon Graphics, 11490 Westheimer Suite 100, Houston, TX  77077

Visualize Whirled Peas
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: "martin tai" <martin.tai@canrem.com>
Subject: film plane flatness
Reply-To: "martin tai" <martin.tai@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 8 Nov 92 04:36:40 EST


   There is from time to time discussion of picture sharpness
and  film plane  flatness.  Is it  exagerated ?

   One  camera  manufacture, ie  Kyocera even  put a  vacuum
machine  in  their  Contax  RTS III  to suck the film flat.

   I think  the  film plane flatness issue is not that
important in picture sharpness. Because no lens however
good   gives perfectly  flat  picture plane any way;
as a matter of  fact,  maximum sharpness can be achieve
with a lens if the  film's contour is curved to fit
the  focal plane, of couse this is not practical.

   In the  new  Contax  S2 brochure,  there is no mention
about  'Ceramic pressure plate', with  Kyocera used on
the  RTS III model, and also on the  Contax T2.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044