HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hpb@hpb.cis.pitt.edu (Harry Bloomberg)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: New Book by Neil Liefer
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:52:29 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: hpb@hpb.cis.pitt.edu


   I was brousing at the Pitt bookstore and stumbled accross a new book
of photos by Neil Leifer, a fameous photographer for Sports Illustrated,
Life, and Time.  The title of the book is "Sports".

   The quality of work in this book is outstanding.  Picking a favorite
photo from this book is difficult, but I've got to select a
mud-splattered portrait of New York Giants linebacker Sam Huff from
November 1962.  Another favorite is a shot of Japanese gymnast Koji
Gusiken performing on the rings with Mount Fuji in the background.

   Leifer bemoans photographing modern football.  Since many of the
games are played on artificial turf, the players don't get dirty and
it's hard to tell from the photo if the action was shot in the 1st or
4th quarter.

   These photographs are so good, that I find myself discouraged with my
own relatively feeble sports photography efforts.  I wonder if Leifer
offers workshops.  I'd like to know how much film he runs through on a
typical assignment, and what percentage of that is in focus and properly
exposed.  I'd also like to know how much he attributes his succesful
photos to his skill and vision as a photographer, and what amount is
from the supurb equipment and lab support from his employers.  (I
wonder what my sports photos would look like if I had Sports Illustrated
behind me.)

Harry Bloomberg
hpb@vms.cis.pitt.edu
From: marc@.East.Sun.COM (Marc Thompson-Sun-Vienna VA-Systems Engineer)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Reliable Strobe System (Speedotron,DynaLite, etc) ?
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:08:32 GMT
Reply-To: marc@.East.Sun.COM (Marc Thompson-Sun-Vienna VA-Systems Engineer)
Organization: sundc.East.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: milan.east.sun.com

Gang,

I am looking at purchasing a strobe system for a home studio. My main
interest is fashion
photography, so I am looking for a system that can handle head shots as
well as full
body.  I have done some preliminary investigating, and have narrowed the
list of stobes
down to the following manufacturers:

1. Speedotron (Black Line, Brown Line)

2. DynaLite

3. White Lightning Ultra

I have put each of these systems on the list for various reasons and strengths.

Speedotron Black Line: Reliable, flexible, short recycle times, powerful.

Speedotron Brown Line: More Affordable.

DynaLite: Reliable, flexible, portable, short recycle times, powerful.

White Lightning Ultra: Affordable, portable, flexible. 

Much of my work will be in black and white, which would allow me to buy a
less powerful strobe, however, I will be shooting a good deal of color.

All of these leads to the following questions:


1. What would be the minimum amount of strobe power needed to do decent
head shots,
   and full body shots (500 w/s, 800 w/s, etc).

2. About speedotron, being on a limited budget, would it make more sense
to buy a
   brown line unit now, and later upgrade to a Black line unit, or would it be 
   smarter to wait until a Black Line unit can be purchased.

3. Could anyone comment on the pros and cons of purchasing the strobe
systems above,
   or other systems you found to be reliable and worth considering.


Thanks,

Marc Thompson ..... 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Sigma 500/7.2; Canon/Nikon AF apertures (was Re: 9xi Re-Visited)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 22:09:05 GMT

In article <1981@intermec.UUCP>, jay@intermec.com (Jay Schlegel x6878) writes:

[Talking about the Sigma 500/7.2 lens]

>    I'm glad Minolta didn't put a f/5.6 limit on AF as per Nikon/Canon.  While AF
> is slower at f/7.2 than with shorter lenses, it's still quite good in reasonable
> light.  On the 7xi, hunting is usually a problem only when shooting in quite dim
> light.
> 

The Sigma 500/7.2 actually works fine in the AF mode on both Canon and Nikon
bodies. I have handled one indoors and found no AF problems. Sigma's rather
incoherent explanation of why they could AF was based upon a suggestion that
some electronics in the lens "fool" the camera into thinking the lens is
in fact f5.6. This doesn't make a lot of sense, but it was all they could
come up with. If the camera thinks it is an f5.6 lens, then I assume you
should be able to set the aperture to f5.6, and that would be what would be
displayed on the LCD panel. I assume it isn't (though never having time to
play with one on my EOS bodies I don't know for sure). I wonder what is
displayed. Since f7.2 is a 1/3 stop increment, is f8 displayed (or f6.7
on an EOS)? I also wonder if it is really f7.2? The 400/5.6 tested by
Popular Photography was 1/2 stop slow - I wonder if they did better with
the 500/7.2?

Incidently I can get fair AF operation most of the time
in decent light with a Canon 10s, a 100-300L zoom and a 1.4x Tamron, as
long as the subject has a reasonable amount of contrast, (i.e at f8 effective
aperture - though the camera thinks it's still f5.6). I assume that the
Canon 1.4x tells the camera the true (f8) aperture of the combination, and
in that case the camera will refuse even to try AF (I haven't tried this, so
I don't know for sure).


===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: campbell@sab59.larc.nasa.gov (Bryan Campbell)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Creative Backgrounds
Date: 9 Nov 1992 21:03:52 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA  USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sab59.larc.nasa.gov

 Brian,

 Thanks!  Good suggestion.
 I had just finished posting a response to Alexandria when
 I came across your posting.  In it I mentioned the thought
 of playing with some gels.  But now your response confirms
 it; I'm going to definitly give it a try!  
 
 Thanks again Brian.
     From Bryan.
 P.S.: Good Name!
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: henny@uieea.ece.uiuc.edu (Henny Graupe)
Subject: Pentax Espio
Summary: problems with film
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:49:03 GMT
Keywords: Pentax Espio AF

I recently bought a Pentax Espio camera and had disapointing results
with the first film ran through it.  I used a role of Kodak 100 speed
"Gold" print film.  When it got back from the processing (Kodak colorwatch
if that makes any difference) the pictures all looked overexposed.   Those
with the flash extremely so,  but everything looks pale.  Is this a
problem with the camera or with the processing or possibly either, and
can i tell which?                                  

Does anyone have experience with the Espio good or bad?

thanks
henny  (henny@uieea.ece.uiuc.edu)
From: ray@tsw.UUCP (Ray Izumi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Sigma Zoom Lens Recommendation
Keywords: zoom lens
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:39:55 GMT
Organization: The System Works, Redmond, WA

In article <1992Nov11.185916.26025@uxmail.ust.hk> cswstang@uxmail.ust.hk (Tang Wai Shing Wilson) writes:
>Hi there,
>
>I just want to ask if anybody have any experience on Sigma 70-210 3.5 APO
>zoom len?  I found it is the relative cheap one within other brands.
>
Is this the UC (ultra-compact) model you're talking about? If so, then I would
recommend it as a good lens for the price. I haven't tested it under any
extreme conditions, but I haven't seen any bad aberrations with it yet after
about 200 slides taken with it. I'm using it on a Nikon 8008s, and the AF
works very well. The one thing I don't care for is the push-pull zoom - I
like a spiral ring zoom better. Also, it is light and compact without having
that "cheap zoom" feel.

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ray Izumi, The System Works, Redmond, WA     206-823-4685      uunet!tsw!ray
"Put the pillow over your head, scream and cry - the garbage is coming!"
           - New York City Commissioner of Sanitation
From: 889kim@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Looking for AF Nikkor zoom lens !!!!!!!!
Date: 6 Nov 92 10:27:26 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

I am looking for Nikon AF Nikkor zoom lens.
Any of following would be considered.

28-70 f/3.5-4.5
28-85 f/3.5-4.5
35-105 f/3.5-4.5
35-135 f/3.5-4.5
75-300 f/4.5-5.6

If you want to part any of those, please email me with your offer.
And please state how old is it.
Of course it should be working well ( like new ?).

Thanks,
Kiyoung
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: CZCI <CZCI@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: <none>
Organization: McGill University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:28:15 GMT

What happen with the list? No more postings?

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: baudais@x400gate.bnr.ca (Michael Baudais)
Subject: Lunar magnification
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.,
Distribution: rec
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:23:07 GMT

I have a general interest question:

Why does the sun/moon appear larger when it is closer to the horizon?

I would guess that the atmosphere acts like a lens, but why is the
image still perfectly round, and up to 2x the size?  And who ground
the atmosphere into the required shape?  :-)

Mike
From: chuq@Apple.COM (Eeyore's Evil Twin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Maxxum 7xi and zoom lenses
Date: 12 Nov 92 04:08:09 GMT
Organization: Pooh Corner Country Club -- A Planned Community

dwing@cudnvr.denver.colorado.edu (Dan Wing) writes:

>I'm looking at purchasing a Minolta Maxxum 7xi.  I'm concerned about the noise 
>of the camera (AF, power zoom, film advance), and would like to minimize the
>noise when necessary.

the 7xi is a pretty quiet camera, especially compared to my old 5000i
(nicknamed R2D2).

>I've noticed that most (all?) lenses available for the camera can be set to 
>manual focus, which should silence the whirring of the motor.

Be aware that if you buy an 'xi' style lens, manual focus is a misnomer.
You're turning off automatic focus, but focussing is still powered by the
engine, unlike an 'i' style lens where turning on manual focus disengages
the focus mechanism completely. (I personally find the 'xi' lenses focus too
slowly under manual focus to be useful, hence all my lenses are 'i' style.
My wife's 7xi has the same lenses in the 'xi' style and she likes them. Both
take nice, crisp pictures).

>Which ones?  My wife will be using the camera on some occassions, 
>and isn't a terribly good photographer, so I'd like to keep the automatic
>composition available with power-zoom, if possible.  

If you want power-zoom, you have to have an 'xi' lens, which brings with it
the powered-non-autofocus. If you want TRUE manual focus, then you won't
find a lens that also supports power-zoom (to my knowledge). On the other
hand, I don't particularly find power-zoom to be a significant advantage.

Between us, we own five lenses and two bodies (both 7xi). She has the
35-105xi and 100-300xi lenses, and I have the 35-105i and 100-300i lenses,
as well as a Sigma 24mmAF.

All four of the Minolta lenses work fine. Whether you like the xi style or
not depends partially on how much you like to dink with things. The more you
do manual focussing, the less you'll lik 'xi' lenses.

Unfortunately, Minolta has phased out it's 'i' line of lenses, so if you
want the older style with real manual focus, you either need to track down a
dealer with older stock or go to a third party lens like Sigma. (one other
thing to worry about with the 'xi' lens. It'll work on an 'i' style camera
like the 5000i, but without any way to enable manual focus. They're pure
point and shoot.

BAsically, the Minolta 'xi' zoom lenses are aimed at people who are doing
more point&shoot stuff and letting the camera do the hard work. The more you
like ot control the process, the less you'll like them. 

>I'm looking at a 28-80mm zoom lens (from Minolta)

Take a look at the 35-105 instead of a 28-80. you give up a little of the
wide angle, but I find it to be a very convenient range, and the lenses I
have are nice and sharp.

-- 
            Chuq "IMHO" Von Rospach, ESD Support & Training (DAL/AUX)
                      Member, SFWA =+= Editor, OtherRealms
                chuq@apple.com | GEnie: MAC.BIGOT | ALink:CHUQ 

    I wanna drive the zamboni! I wanna drive the zamboni, yes I do.
From: eddie@cstr.ed.ac.uk (Eddie Rooney)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Calculating exposure with wide-angle lens
Date: 9 Nov 92 13:35:10 GMT
Organization: Centre for Speech Technology Research, Edinburgh University

I use exposure tables with my SLR because the built in TTL light meter is
broken.  Mostly they work fine, but I've discovered that when I use my 35mm
wide-angle lens my pictures are overexposed.  Is this because of the lens
construction (number of elements etc.), or because you are taking in more
light (from a larger area), or both, or something else?  Is there a simple
way to compensate for this, or some rule I can follow which will tell me
how many stops to close down the aperture (or in the case of longer focal
lengths, to open up)?  Thanks for any advice.

=========================================================================

Edmund Rooney					email:eddie@cstr.ed.ac.uk

Centre for Speech Technology Research
University of Edinburgh
80, South Bridge,
Edinburgh EH1 1HN
Scotland

=========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: abelsey@scoayr.enet.dec.com (Andy Belsey)
Subject: Re: slow sync and red eye on Canon EOS 100 (Elan)
Reply-To: abelsey@scoayr.enet.dec.com (Andy Belsey)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:31:09 GMT

RE: the red-eye reduction lamp on the Canon EOS 100 (Elan in the U.S.):

 The flash pop-up button to the left of the viewfinder doubles as a red-eye
reduction
enable switch.  Once enabled, the red-eye reduction stays that way; the LCD eye
symbol comes on as does the green viewfinder eye symbol. 

 Try pressing this button when the flash is popped up in one of the creative
modes. The
eye symbol should appear on the LCD and the red-eye reduction lamp should then
be
enabled. I can't see any reason for Canon disabling this lamp in any of the
creative modes. I
noticed that on my EOS 100, the flash won't pop up if the mode restricts its use
(e.g.
landscape mode).

/andy
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: faust@faust.enet.dec.com ()
Subject: Re: Sharpness
Keywords: Sharp
Reply-To: faust@faust.enet.dec.com ()
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:25:15 GMT


--

It hasnt been mentioned here, or I may have just overlooked it. but, the
first order of business is to make sure your technique will give you the
sharpness that you are looking for. Once that is settled, then you can start
to look at the equipment end of things.

Here is how to do a quick test;  (abbreviated version...)

	Buy a roll of film. Whatever you used before should be fine, and will
	give you apples to apples comparison

	Mount your camera on a tripod. Make sure it is secure, and that it will
	minimize all camera/lens movement (ie, dont do this on a windy day
	outdoors, etc).

	Find a subject that has lots of detail (brick wall, granite rocks,
	newspaper print at a distance, etc).

	Take a series of photos of the item at various shutter speeds/aperture
	combonations (if you are not familiar with this, mail me...). Try to
	do the series from around 1/15th to your highest speed, while setting 
	the approrpiate aperture for a correct exposure. Write down the SS
	and Aperture for all shots. If you camera has a mirror lock, use it. If
	not, use the self timer. Always use a cable release to reduce vibration.

	Have the film developed, then examine them for sharpness.

You may find that certain shutter speed and aperture combonations might produce
a slightly sharper image than others. This is common. However, if they are
really different, it could be the equipment or technique, and you'll have to 
dig deeper.

Hope this help...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen R Faust                                         faust@bagels.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corp.                            faust@bagels.enet.dec.com
Networks and Communications                                   (508) 486-7433
Littleton, MA
============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson)
Subject: Re: Medium format - buying advice wanted
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 08:49:39 GMT
Organization: Data General AB, Akalla, Sweden

In article <1d4t9tINN56@manuel.anu.edu.au>, robertm@cres1.anu.edu.au (Robert McArthur) writes:

> 6x9:
>   Again, the only ones I know about are the, Fuji I think, 69 but they have
> fixed focal length - no lens changes.  If someone can extoll the virtues, as
> I know nothing else about them, I could be pursuaded...

Many large format cameras can be fitted with a roll film back for 6x9 or
even 6x12 cm. This gives you all the features of a large format camera with
the associated weight ;-) There are also smaller "large" format cameras
especially made for the 6x9 format.

-- 
------------------------------ 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: dp@world.std.com (Jeff DelPapa)
Subject: Re: photomanipulation
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:44:13 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.204928.23850@adobe.com> usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS) 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

This partly I am sure depends on your audiences - for some, real care
doesn't seem to be needed... - I was reading one of the tabloids while
waiting in the supermarket checkout line (Someone must buy those, they
can't just be a means to keep us paitent while waiting). cover story
was about toddler that could lift his parent. the manipulation was
obviously done by someone with hobby grade gear. lots of aliaising
artifacts in the grass (backyard shot), and jaggies along the very
visible edge where the parent had been cut from another photo and
rotated into place. (let alone no gravity affects in moms hair, etc)

<dp>

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: elau@berlioz.nsc.com (Eugene Lau)
Subject: Re: Sharpness
Keywords: Sharp
Organization: National Semiconductor Corporation
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:54:40 GMT

In article <Bx8EpM.Lzs@acsu.buffalo.edu> tklai@acsu.buffalo.edu (Tobysze K. Lai) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.023325.20009@cs.mun.ca> michael9@cs.mun.ca (Michael Sullivan) writes:
>>
>>  The problem is, my pictures aren't coming out as sharp as I would like.
>>Is the sharpness of a photo strictly a function of lense quality?  Or am
>>I not doing something quite right?
>>
>Where did you take the pictures to develop?  One-hour photo store or you 
>develop them by yourself?  One possibility is, if you bring the film to those
>photo finishing labs, the sharpness of the pictures  may vary, depending on
>each indiviual store.  Even the sharpness of the pictures may vary from the 
>same negative printed by the same store.
>
that's right.  I had my pictures developed and printed at the price club once.
the print was in focus but not very sharp.  when I took the same negative to
a lab recommended by a fellow netter, the print was noticeably sharper, and 
the print was only a 4x6.

sharpness will depend on your steadiness more than anything else.  that's why
everyone suggests using a tripod whenever you can.  lens and film are also
important, and the lab too (for printing).

eugene
From: memsthd@prism.gatech.EDU (MIKE WILEMAN)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: How good are Minox 35mm cameras?
Date: 10 Nov 92 18:52:23 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

I've been thinking about checking out a Minox for awhile now, but good
sources of information on these guys seem rare.  Could someone who know
please post a brief list of the different models available with a summary
of their features and dimensions.

Thanks,
Mike



-- 
MIKE WILEMAN
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!memsthd
Internet: memsthd@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Photography book club (anyone know address somewhere in NJ??)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 18:25:03 GMT

A few months ago I got an ad in the mail for a sort of "photography book
of the month club" (one of those deals where you get a few books cheap
up front, then have to buy X more in the next Y months). It looked
interesting, but I lost the ad! Does anyone know about such an outfit?
I believe they were located in NJ somewhere, but I don't remember the
name or address.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tjwu@athena.mit.edu (Thomas J Wu)
Subject: Re: Regular AF Lenses vs. USM Lenses
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:12:40 GMT

In article <140642@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> agosta@llnl.gov (Keith Agosta) writes:
>
>  I am new to photography, but I just bought a Canon EOS Elan Camera with a
>  Sigma 35mm-115mm AF lens for the Canon. Is there any advantage to Ultrasonic
>  Motor Lenses, in terms of spped of focus, quality, etc., as opposed to the 
>  regular AF lenses?

Ultrasonic Motor (USM) lenses focus much faster than ordinary AF lenses and
you can't hear the motor turning (unless you have your ear against the lens
barrel :)  The Canon 35-135 USM is optically better than the Sigma 35-135,
and I believe it also lets you use the focusing ring in AF mode.

>  I'd appreciate any input.
>
>  Thanks!
>
>  --KA :P)

Thomas Wu
Internet:  tjwu@athena.mit.edu