HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mpc+@pitt.edu (Mike Contento)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Camera World
Date: 3 Sep 92 18:30:13 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

>From: gduna@snafu.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (George Duna)
>
>Any one have any recommendations buying from Camera World of
>Oregon.
>
>George Duna gduna@Sun.com
=====================================================================
   I just ordered a new camera (Canon SureShot Megazoom 76) from CWO
   last Tuesday and received it yesterday (a day earlier than promised!)

   Since I just got it, I can't give you any info on their return policies
   but as far as ordering the camera itself, it was a very pleasant experience
   especially compared to the horror stories I've read about other dealers.
   
   PS: Thanks to all who sent me Email advice on buying the camera
-- 
[mike contento] I'm a walking ecomomy - my hairline's in a recession, 
[ univ.of pgh.] my waist is a victim of inflation, and together 
[mpc+@pitt.edu] they're putting me in a deep depression!"   -M. Segal
Newsgroups: rec.photo,alt.cd-rom,gnu.misc.discuss,misc.int-property
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photo-CD
Date: 3 Sep 92 07:23:44 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

axman@acadia.Kodak.COM (Mike Axman) writes:

>And you're not the only one.  Current Photo CD plans are to extend the format
>to include 4kx6k, 8kx12k, and 16kx24k resolutions, and the there is nothing 
>that precludes even higher resolution if the industry demands it in the 
>years to come.  

OK, I'll bite.  16KX24KX24bits is 1,152,000,000 bytes if my trusty 
HP didn't overflow.  How you gonna do that?  Granted, fractal compression
or something whippy you guys come up with may compress this down to
what would fit on a CD-ROM but how are you gonna handle the data from 
the scanner?  Even taking an hour to do a scan would produce a data
stream at 2.56mb/sec.  

Now I'm a rank amateur at this graphics stuff so how about giving us
a nickel tour of how you plan on doing this.

John "Waiting for his Terabyte drive" De Armond
-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine (TM) |
Marietta, Ga                         |Interested in high tech and computers? 
jgd@dixie.com                        |Write me about PE Magazine
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: polycarbonate camera bodies
Date: 26 Aug 1992 20:08:25 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: concertina

In article <6e1D03EK6dsV00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> bjs@uts.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman) writes:
>Richard A Hyde writes:
>
>>Well, I've seen a lot of theoretical discussion...
>
>We're absolute experts at that here!  :-)  To say nothing of absolute 
>speculation, er, excuse me.  Make that "informed extrapolation".  ;-)

Oh!

So *that's* what WAG means.  :}







--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of making many books there is no end...  |  What's wrong with chasing 
                       -- Eccl. 12:12    |  nebulae till 3 am?  |-(
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com (Ken J. McFadden)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Fuji Slide Film or Pushing Kodachrome
Date: 26 Aug 92 20:59:58 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Unisys Corporation, Tredyffrin

I've been pretty happy with Kodachrome 25 and 64 for quite a while.  However I
want to shoot some faster slide film and I don't like Ektachrome (spelling?)
and also disliked the results I have gotten with Kodachrome 200.

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?

The other thing that I might want to try is exposing Kodachrome 64 at a higher
speed and then getting it push (or is it pull) processed.  Has anyone tried
this combination?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken McFadden        kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com
Unisys Corporation  kjm@cnmsa.tredydev.unisys.com
P.O. Box 203        work: (215) 648-3742
Paoli, PA 19301     home: (215) 675-0382
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: frank@truevision.com (Frank Loffel)
Subject: Kodak Slide Stack Loader: good?
Organization: Truevision Inc., Indianapolis, IN
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 04:33:41 GMT

Hello

Kodak is offering an acessory stack loader for their Ektagraphic projectors.
Does this gadget work well?
Does it work with the Carousel projectors as well?

My Adorama catalog lists a price of $46.95 for the unit.

By the way, is it true that the Carousel's are no longer manufactured?

Thanks for any comments.


-- 
-- Frank Loffel, Truevision, Inc., uunet!epicb!frank frank@truevision.com :-) --
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Sto-Fen Omni Bounce?
Date: 31 Aug 92 06:06:39 GMT

In <1992Aug31.065410.1@cc.curtin.edu.au> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes:

> If you stick a difuser on the frount, and don't lift it a little, it
> will believe the IR pre-flash and underexpose the shot. The exposure
> info will lie. With the flash up a little ( I stick a match under moine
> so it won't 'reset' on me ) the low power flash passes through the
> diffuser, and is factored into the exposure calcs.

This is true.  However, you are talking about an ATTL preflash.  However,
I was talking about manual mode, which does not produce a preflash.
Given that the Omni Bounce supposedly costs 2-1/2 stops of light, I was
planning to divide the suggested flash-to-subject distance by 3 in
relative darkness, and by 2 in the presence of some ambient light.
(Was I being naive?)

What flash diffusers/filters do you use on your flash?  How are they
mounted?  Do you have a special clip to hold filters?

Most importantly, are you a happy flash photographer?  If so, please
share your technique!  (Eg. do you fiddle with flash exp. comp. when
you are photographing someone wearing dark clothes, and by how much,
etc.?)

Thanks.

>~Paul

ACS
-- 
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|      Democracy is not a way of getting better solutions.     |
| - | --|__ |           It's just a way to spread the blame.               |
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: A FAQ
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 05:38:52 GMT

In article <22309@venera.isi.edu> finn@dalek.isi.edu (Greg Finn) writes:
>In article <1992Aug31.200909.9909@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>
>>Oops....I said in my earlier post if you held the both cameras
>>you would notice the difference immediately. <That Canon's AF is faster
>>than Nikon's>.
>
>	Really?  An F4 has a large hi-torque AF motor.  Larger than is
>reasonable to put in non-telephoto lenses.  Are you sure?  You tested
>equivalent lenses across the lens range?  The auto-focusing range for
>the lenses was equivalent?  If you test a macro-capable against a
>standard lens of the same focal length ... guess which has a longer
>focus throw?
>
It is common knowledge in the industry and most unbiased
photo sales persons that the CANON AF lenses focus faster.
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 have however done alot of
reading and listened to informed photo sales clerks in
their assessment and they have ascertained that the
Canon AF lenses focus faster.  Just about anyone can pick 
up either camera with equal focal length and simple compose and 
press the shutter.  The Canon USM lenses in particular will focus 
faster.  To say that the F4 has hi-torque AF motor is academic,
it does not prove it is faster.  It still has to transfer this torque
to the lens.  The Canon AF lenses have the motor built INTO
the lenses.  This will inherently transfer the torque
directly to the lens, thereby focusing faster.  I suggest you
walk into your local photo store, as I have and check it
out for yourself.
-- 
        ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
 		"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination
	       is out of focus."   -     Mark Twain
From: axman@acadia.Kodak.COM (Mike Axman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Seeking advice on solarization.
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:22:06 GMT
Organization: Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY

>From article <19869@drutx.ATT.COM>, by chuck@drutx.ATT.COM (LucianoC):
>> Here is a topic I've never seen discussed before. I have attempted this on a 
>> number of occasions with limited success. I would like to know what advice
>> is out there about producing dramatic solarized images.
>

If you get a chance, and have access to a scanner, etc... try converting 
a RGB image to luminance/chrominance and then run the 2 chroma channels 
through a crazy look-up-table.  Another neat effect is just to swap the 
2 chroma channels (great for scenes with no people but lots of skies, etc...)

mike


-- 
Mike Axman  
CD-Imaging Advanced Development
Eastman Kodak Company
axman@acadia.kodak.com



DISCLAIMER:
Kodak gives me this Net access for free, but they aren't responsible for my postings.
From: koonj@hpsgl1.sgp.hp.com (Koon-Jan LIM)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 05:22:41 GMT
Subject: Re: Running 110v enlarger with 240v supply
Organization: Asia Peripherals Division, HP Singapore
Newsgroups: rec.photo

In rec.photo, bwm@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Brian McBride) writes:

    I have just returned from a few years working in the US.  I bought a Bessler
    67S englarger when I was out there and have brought it back with me.

    The UK mains voltage is 240v 50Hz.  I bought a 240 to 110 stepdown transformer
    and a voltage stabilizer.  After connecting everything up, I have blown my 
    original lamp and the spare in about 15 minutes usage each.  The lamp housing
    is getting hotter than I remember also.


    I have two requests:

            1) does anyone have a phone number for Besseler in the US I can call
               for advice.

            2) can anyone suggest what has gone----------



	    ******************************************************************

	    For me, it was the other way round.
	    I was posted to the States and I brought my 240v 50 Hz slide projector
	    with me. I used a 110 to 240 transformer but the lamp kept blowing out.
	    I asked around and got answers that either I don't understand fully or
	    are vague. They include; 
	    1) different frequencies 50Hz versus 60Hz.
	    2) transformm
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Re: Rechargable type of lithium 
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:14:32 GMT

In article <92243.213609M05BC@CUNYVM.BITNET>, M05BC@CUNYVM.BITNET (Spartacus@Cuny) writes:
> In article <1992Aug28.071044.20090@jyu.fi>, konkkola@jyu.fi (Markku Konkkola)
> says:
> >In article 23989@leland.Stanford.EDU, babyduck@leland.Stanford.EDU (Tim Chen)
> >writes:
> >> Does anyone know of a rechargable replacement for the lithium batter for such
> >> cameras as the Canon EOS or the Nikon 6006?  I'm not too keen on buying tons
> >> of lithium batteries even though they last a long time, I'm more interested
> >
> >About 6 rolls in my EOS 10 with EF 2.8/300 - is it a long time??
> >
> >
> >Make
> 
>      It might help to remove the batteries from you're camera
> when you aren't using it.  Some cameras continue to use battery
> power even if the camera is turned off.  I know this for a
> fact on Minolta Maxxum bodies.  I would average 3-4 rolls
> per battery on my Maxxum 8000i.  Until I removed the
> battery during long periods of non-use.  I now average
> 25-27 rolls of 36exp.  I've also noticed part of the LCD display
> is active even with the power is off.  When I remove the battery
> the entire display goes blank.  Maybe EOS camera are similar
> 
> I hope this helps.

EOS cameras do not draw appreciable current when "off" (unless they are faulty).
The "off" position on the switch is actually a "locked" position, meaning the
camera doesn't do anything (focus, fire shutter) when you press the buttons
- EXCEPT draw current. Quiescent current is the same in the locked position
as any other position - so you don't even need to switch to "locked". The
important point is that the camera will draw current whenever a button is
pressed, no matter where the main switch is set.

The original poster was using a 300/2.8 lens. This is a fast focusing USM lens
with a lot of glass to move and the USM motor can really suck up current. I
strongly suspect this is the reason for only 6 rolls per battery. With regular
lenses numbers closer to 20/30 rolls per battery are more common.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: E-3 and E-4 processing
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:44:13 GMT

In article <246@metran.UUCP>, jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes:
> : 
> : I have 2 rolls of Ektachrome Infrared AERO 8443 IE135, and a roll of INFRARED
> : ( IR135 ) in my pocket. Any one got a data sheet for the IR? Or a E-6 mod
> : for E-3 films?
> 
> The newer Ektachrome IR (process E-4) can be processed with the Kodak Slide
> Hobby Pac as long as the temperature is at or below 74F.  Maybe that will
> work for yours as well.  What's the difference between E-3 and E-4?
> 
> Jay Ts

Ah, now that is testing the memory. I may have inerted this in the last 20
years or so... no, Morgan & Morgan agree with memory. :-)

E-3				E-4
				Preharden
				Neutralizer
1st Dev				1st Dev
Rinse
Hardener
				1st Stop Bath

lights on from here.....
Wash				Wash
Reverse Expose
Colour Dev			Colour Dev
				2nd Stop Bath
Wash				Wash
Clearing Bath
Rinse
Bleach				Bleach
Rinse
Fix				Fix
Wash				Wash
Stabilize			Stabilize
Dry				Dry

E-3 was for the profesional Eks, E-4 used a fogging developer.
Since E-4 is now processed in E-6 with a pre-hardener, and E-3 does not
have a pre-hardener, can I just plug E-3 film into a E-6 line and get away
with it??

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jchen@flash.bellcore.com (Jason Chen)
Subject: Re: Need film recommendation for baby's birth
Reply-To: jchen@flash.UUCP (Jason Chen)
Organization: Bellcore, Morristown NJ
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 04:47:32 GMT

Facing the same problem two months ago, I brought with me a dozen films 
from iso-100 to 1600. 

I found that the lighting in the delivery room would require at least
iso-400 films.  If you are going to use a small aperture zoom lens, you
should consider iso-1600. Although a flash is allowed in my hospital,
direct flash is not recommended because it sometimes disturbs the baby. 

I personally used Fuji Super HG-400 and a 28-80 zoom. Some pictures taken
in the delivery room showed shake. Some of those were taken by the nurses 
who didn't know how much of photography. Some of bad picture were
taken by me who forgot much about photography because of the excitement
(tip: keep your head cool).

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.

C. Jason Chen 
jchen@flash.bellcore.com
From: savoia@sw.stratus.com (Rick Savoia)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Photograping Whales [8008s autofocus problem]
Date: 31 Aug 92 14:45:55 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.




This past weekend, I went on a whale watch and brought
along my 8008s.  I was hoping to get a good picture of 
a whale as it breached.  Well, when we got to the site,
I started snapping the tails flapping and blowholes 
blowing and everything was going fine.  Then one of 
the whales started breaching.  I went over to the side
of the boat pointed my camera in the general direction
(you really can't tell where they will come up!)  and waited.
The whale was a few hundred yards off of the boat and I
was using a 35-105 AF Nikkor lens.  The problem I had
was when the whale breached, the camera would rack 
back and forth trying to find the focus.  The whale 
doesn't stay up for long (you try keeing that many tons 
in the air for long!) and I would usually get the whale
falling back into the water.  

My question:  Given that I should have just focussed on 
a point in the approximate area and held the auto-focus
lock (I realized afterwards), was there any other way 
I could have done this and insured accurate autofocus?
I finally switched to manual focus and let it remain on 
infinity.  I would have preferred autofocus, but it seems
that AF cameras can't focus that quickly!  Any ideas for
next time?



Rick
========================================================
Rick Savoia                     |	This 
savoia@watts.sqa.stratus.com    |	space
rsavoia@beirut.sqa.stratus.com  |	 for 
Rick_Savoia@vos.stratus.com     |       rent.
========================================================
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 20:07:18 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.

The Canon lenses focus quicker.  If you hold a Canon AF camera
and a Nikon AF camera, you will notice the difference
immediately.
-- 
        ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
 		"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination
	       is out of focus."   -     Mark Twain
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ken@cs.Princeton.EDU ()
Subject: What writes on Pakon slide mounts?
Originator: ken@elan
Organization: Princeton University, Dept. of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 05:19:30 GMT

Can anyway tell me what writes well on Pakon plastic slide mounts?

Thank, Ken.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ken Steiglitz                              internet:    ken@princeton.edu
Dept. of Computer Science                    bitnet:    ken@pucc
35 Olden Street
Princeton University                            tel:    609-258-4629
Princeton, NJ 08544-2087                        fax:    609-258-1771  
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: davest@sequent.com (David C. Stewart)
Subject: Re: Slide indexing ideas(?)
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
Distribution: rec
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 18:00:47 GMT

hamm@weejordy.physics.mun.ca (Craig Hamm) writes:

>	I don't necessarily want the name of a particular piece of
>	software here, I would just like to hear suggestions on how to 
>	index large numbers of slides.  i.e. cataloging.

	I liked the indexing concept which was described in the Time/Life
photography series many years ago.  This system was what they used
at Time/Life to index pictures.  The basic idea was to attach a unique
number to every roll (proof sheet, slide page), then cross-index the
number into catagories.

	Does anyone have a better description than this?  I admit that
I never got around to fully implementing it, but it sounded like a
great idea.
-- 
David C. Stewart                       	uunet!sequent!davest
Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.		davest@sequent.com
From: philw@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Philip W White)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nikon FG (? info wanted)
Date: 30 Aug 92 00:28:10 GMT
Organization: Tektronix Inc., Beaverton, Or.

>In article <1992Aug27.002319.8577@citec.oz.au>, sgccpgs@citec.oz.au (Paul
>Salanitri) wrote:
>> What is the difference between an FG and an FG-20, I know the latter is
>> slightly newer, but is it a super set, at does it lack some features that
>> the FG has?????

No one has yet mentionned something I remember imperfectly: 
 
The FG20 does not indicate both actual and recommended shutter
speeds.  It shows one or the other.  The FG shows both; I have
an FG and find this useful.  Of course it can be confusing
to see one LED lit for the manually-selected shutter speed and
another lit for the speed the meter says you should use.
But I like having the extra info.

      Phil White   Tektronix, Beaverton, OR
USENET:  philip.w.white@tek.COM
 US Mail: Mail Stop 59-432, P.O. Box 500, Beaverton OR 97077-0001
From: sog@craycos.com (Steve Gombosi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: selenium wash
Date: 27 Aug 92 04:48:58 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

In article <1992Aug26.203916.13174@odin.corp.sgi.com> donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis) writes:
>
>In article <1992Aug26.173212.26513@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk>,
>jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) writes:
>
>|> > noticeable.  If you can`t get hold of "The Print" and want to know the
>|> > Adams procedure, send me some mail, I'll look it up.
>|> 
>|> Which reminds me of something else in that book.  He describes a procedure
>|> he calls "clearing the whites" - dunking the print in dilute reducer after
>|> fixing.  This was intended to produce more brilliant highlights.  He writes
>|> as if he did it routinely.  I have never seen that recommended anywhere
>|> else or heard of anyone else doing it.  Was it required because Adams'
>|> paper/developer combination was exceptionally prone to fog, or what?
>|> Anyone out there do it?
>
>Are you sure this was Adams book you're thinking of?  I've heard of
>other photographers routinely using reducers, but what I remember of
>The Print is that Adams didn't really like reducers, and used them as a
>last resort.  I don't recall any statements about "clearing the
>whites"; 

From _The_Print_ (Basic Photo Series), 1st edition, 1950:

P.56, under the heading "Clearing the Whites"

	Even slight fog in a print veils the whites and
	reduces brilliancy and sparkle. The veiling occurs
	with many modern papers, especially when fully developed
	in order to yield a rich tonality. To overcome this 
	effect, the washed and dried print is subjected to 
	treatment in a bleaching solution (page 116). Do not
	attempt to clear the whites after toning.

Page 116 gives a formula for a rather mild bromine/cyanide bleach, with
the following comment:

	The following formula is designed to serve as a slight 
	bleach, providing a means of clearing the whites and
	brightening the image to a very considerable extent.

Steve