| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 12/24 |
| 2005/6/7-9 [Consumer/Camera] UID:38028 Activity:low |
6/7 Using a 128 Meg sandisk compact flash card that I've had
for a little over a year in a digital camera that I've had for
nearly 7 years, I took a picture and when I went to look
at it, it was corrupted as were a few images I had taken
before. Is it likely the fault of the card or the camera?
Could it be that I switched the camera to the "view" mode before
the camera had time to completely write the picture to the card?
If the problem is likely with the card, will reformatting it help
prevent this from happening in the future, or is it better to just
use a new card?
\_ what are we, psychic? experiment with it and see what happens.
\- metadata or data corruption? there are some recovery softwares
but frankly 1. format in the camera [not on PC] and take some
test shots 2. if that is ok, then cross your fingers and hope
it was transient problem 3. otherwise the replacement cost of
a 128mb card is so low low [<$20], just get a new one and use
that for "important" pictures.
\_ Nice delete. I've had this happen to me. CF cards are cheap, get
a new one. -John |
| 2005/5/26 [Consumer/Camera, Computer/HW/Printer] UID:37843 Activity:nil |
5/26 Workarounds for problems on Canon DSLR w/ Lexar 80x CF cards:
http://tinyurl.com/85qnq |
| 2005/5/19-20 [Consumer/Camera] UID:37774 Activity:nil |
5/19 DHL sucks = it means "Drop you shipment at the door, hope someone
doesn't steal it, and then just leave"
\_ Uhm, that's not terribly unique to DHL.
\_ the way it matches their name is
\- in the stealing scenario at least you should be covered.
what pissed me off is when some shipper left a bunch of
fast film on my doorstep on a 95degree day.
\_ You are still using film are you saying? ;)
\_ Not the pp, but I still use film as well. I actually
like being able to achieve different results with
different film.
\_ I mail-order film too, but I always ship it to my
work place.
work place. I have a digital point&shoot, but I use my
two film SLRs for serious shooting. -- !pp
\_ You can achieve different results with different
digicam settings (sensor sensitivity etc)
\- yes i know. i shoot digital and film. and you
achieve diff results shooting diff settings and
diff films. --pp |
| 2005/4/21-23 [Consumer/Camera] UID:37307 Activity:nil |
4/21 Nikon announces D50, its new lowest end digital SLR. I wonder how much
the street price is going to be. |
| 2005/4/10-12 [Consumer/Camera] UID:37136 Activity:moderate |
4/10 My wife is taking a vacation and needs a portable digital photo
storage device. She's not a technophile, so something easy-to-use
would be great. Any recommendations? Thx enlightened MOTD-sters!
\_ If you don't mind getting an iPod, check out the Apple iPod
camera connector and the Belkin iPod media reader.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0503/05032401ipod_cameraconnector.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0310/03101701belkinipodadapt.asp
\_ I don't understand why extra 256MB CF cards for $20 each can't
satisfy her ... like you can, that is. -Hans
\_ Seconded. I've tried lugging around a laptop to store photos,
and it's not worth it for a two- or three-week trip. 1G memory
cards are $60 to $80 -- they're small, light, easy to use, and
nearly indestructible.
\_ If her camera uses CF get her 1 GB CF card or a 2 GB Micro
drive. Unless she is shooting RAW w/ a 20D, this should be
more than enough for a vacation.
\_ [ follow-ups below reformatted - formatd ]
I have an X-Drive II, it's small, and easy to use, it accepts all
types of memory cards and you can upgrade the HD at any time. If you\
don't want to bother buying more and more memory cards I would suggest\
something simmilar. -scottyg
types of memory cards and you can upgrade the HD at any time. If
you don't want to bother buying more and more memory cards I would
suggest something simmilar. -scottyg
\_ Thx for the suggestion, scottyg.
FYI, she has a Nikon D70 and will shoot in RAW format (big files).
She already has a 1GB flash card (plenty for 1 day of shooting), but
may need more storage for a 6+ week trip. I'll check out the X-
Drive. Thx.
\-if you are serious about photography, get a 50-100gig portable
She already has a 1GB flash card (plenty for 1 day of shooting),
but may need more storage for a 6+ week trip. I'll check out the
X-Drive. Thx.
\- if you are serious about photography, get a 50-100gig
\- actually even
20g may be ok.
storage device. the "store everything on CF" is not reasonable
for +1week. if you are very serious [meaning professional and
if you lose the pictures, there will be serious problems, i.e.
you need to backup or upload on the road], then you might
consider the portable burners. it sounds like you are in the
middle category. details like whether you are on the power grid
or not, how much stuff you are carrying, theft probability also
affect decisions on the margins. road trip through the southwest
!= high himalaya. if you are looking at something hardcore,
go to like an REI and browse this:
http://www.bookpool.com/sm/1592003885 [worth a browse. unclear
necessity to buy]. --psb, link:csua.org/u/bmr
portable storage device. the "store everything on CF" is
not reasonable for +1week. if you are very serious [meaning
professional and if you lose the pictures, there will be
serious problems, i.e. you need to backup or upload on the
road], then you might consider the portable burners. it
sounds like you are in the middle category. details like
whether you are on the power grid or not, how much stuff
you are carrying, theft probability also affect decisions
on the margins. road trip through the southwest != high
himalaya. if you are looking at something hardcore, go to
like an REI and browse this:
http://www.bookpool.com/sm/1592003885 [worth a browse.
unclear necessity to buy]. --psb, link:csua.org/u/bmr
\_ 50-100gb?!!! It's sad to see digital cameras promoting
"shotgun" photography.
\- ok henri. the marginal cost of extra gb is really small.
if you need 20gb for a 2 week trip and next year you
might go on a 3 week trip with 2 cameras and by then
you have bought an 8mp camera, you might as well spend
the extra $1/gb upfront. on a recent photo trip i took
maybe 10 pictures of sunrise over the ganges. in the
evening i was shooting a religious festival on the
banks ... since people are moving i shot 70 or 80 pix
in maybe 15min. that's because everything is motion, so
you are sort of doing "compositional bracketing" rather
than exposure braketing. i still think there is some
difference with latency on digitals and more shots of
people seem to be mistimed. BTW: i took 500-600 digital
pix in ~4 days and 6 film shots. 4 or 5 of the film
shots are keepers while maybe 20 of the digitals. but
if i was shooting all film, i wouldnt have gotten maybe
\- ok henri. the marginal cost of extra gb is really
small. if you need 20gb for a 2 week trip and next
year you might go on a 3 week trip with 2 cameras and
by then you have bought an 8mp camera, you might as
well spend the extra $1/gb upfront. on a recent photo
trip i took maybe 10 pictures of sunrise over the
ganges. in the evening i was shooting a religious
festival on the banks ... since people are moving i
shot 70 or 80 pix in maybe 15min. that's because
everything is motion, so you are sort of doing
"compositional bracketing" rather than exposure
bracketing. i still think there is some difference
with latency on digitals and more shots of people
seem to be mistimed. BTW: i took 500-600 digital pix
in ~4 days and 6 film shots. 4 or 5 of the film shots
are keepers while maybe 20 of the digitals. but if i
was shooting all film, i wouldnt have gotten maybe
half the shots i did with the "digital shotgun". --psb
\- btw, i also use digital cameras as what you might
call a documentary device in addition to photography.
i might take a picture of a menu or a sign or a food
item just for informational value. --psb
\_ Isn't there a Compact Flash -> ipod interface doohicky
you can get? Also, shotgun photography is a major
technique of National Geographic. There is a reason
why their photographs are sooo good.
\_ I watched a NG special a fews ago and which gave
me the impression that most NG photographers are
still film. The ones that shoot digital probably
use something like a 1DS Mk2 w/ an L series IS
lens.
\_ you can do shotgun photography with film. Most
good, serious photographers take a lot of photos.
-tom
\- it depends on what you are shooting. there
are a couple of schools of thought on this.
HCB is famous for deriding peopel for shooting
like crazy instead of looking for the "decisive
moment". but shooting in paris != shooting on
the african savannah. shotgun != bracketing.
\_ check out Flashtrax products: http://www.smartdisk.com
Or Wolverine products (can buy at Fry's, $150 for 40GB). |
| 2005/3/29-30 [Consumer/Camera] UID:36945 Activity:nil |
3/29 Doesn't the UCB dean's office have a security camera or something? |
| 2005/3/14-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:36680 Activity:nil |
3/14 Is there a good website for mp3 reviews like http://dpreview.com? \_ MP3s or MP3 players? \_ players \_ For players, do look at the Archos Gmini 440. I just got one and it's teh r0xx0r. -John |
| 2005/3/9-10 [Consumer/Camera] UID:36595 Activity:high |
3/9 I just watched "Bend it Like Beckham" last night, and I was
wondering if anyone could tell me what's up with the scene where,
during the wedding, a bunch of guys beat up the camera man and try
to steal his camera. What was up with that?
\_ One of the guys involved in the scuffle was makin' out in the
bathroom with that one girl, so I assume that was her bf.
It did seem a rather random scene.
\_ I just found this: http://www.moviemistakes.com/film2153/questions
\_ I just found: http://www.moviemistakes.com/film2153/questions
\- "there is always a fight at an indian wedding".
This is basically true. --psb
\_ Are you going to have a wedding like that psb? Will you
invite me? -jrleek
\- I just sulk and skulk at indian weddings ...
http://home.lbl.gov:8080/~psb/tmp/PSB-dhuti+pepsi.jpg
http://home.lbl.gov:8080/~psb/tmp/PSB-Blvd.jpg
\_ What are you wearing?
\_ Maybe in north indian weddings or non-bramhin
weddings.
\- There is a funny line in monsoon wedding about
panjabis vs bengalis at wedding and such.
\_ I can't believe that you of all people
watch such trash
\_ The coach in that movie is the biggest eurofag...
\_ You now know what you need to do to attract chix.
\_ Gah. Do you think it's worth it? |
| 12/24 |
| 2005/2/26-28 [Consumer/Camera] UID:36434 Activity:nil |
2/26 Are there relatively cheap HD camcorders (<$10K) that can stream
directly to a high-end (PCIe) PC? I'm trying to see if the new
Sony camcorder has this capability, but have not gotten any real
answers.
\_ at the macworld keynote, steve jobs talked about a new really cheap
($3500) camera that does HD. not sure if it does what you want,
but check it out. |
| 2005/2/21-22 [Consumer/Camera] UID:36349 Activity:kinda low |
2/21 Is there any reason to think that an older 2 megapixel digital
camera would have trouble with a 1GB compact flash card?
Previously, I've never used anything above 256Megs with it.
Also, is the Ultra II Compact Flash any significant advantage
over standard CompactFlash?
\_ There are two different CF connectors; your older camera probably
has a Type 1 connector, which might not work with your 1GB card
or anything labeled "Ultra II". CF cards vary in speed, check
review sites. -tom
\_ How about with a 512M card?
\_ You may encounter an ancient limitation : FAT 12-bit limits the
number of files in each directory and root. |
| 2005/1/31 [Politics/Domestic/California, Consumer/Camera] UID:35995 Activity:moderate |
1/31 Brain Washing 101
http://www.brain-terminal.com/video/brainwashing-101.html
\_ All that brainwashing, and he's still a knee-jerk dittohead.
How depressing. |
| 2005/1/28 [Consumer/Camera] UID:35947 Activity:high |
1/28 Why do eyes turn red in photos, and how do you stop this from happening?
\_ Your flash is reflecting off the back of people's eyeballs.
Probably the best way to stop it is to use better lighting
(don't flash directly into people's eyes). It's probably better
to remove it in Photoshop than to bother with your camera's
"red eye reduction" feature (which pre-flashes a light to get
people's pupils to constrict). -tom
\_ Why is the photoshop approach better? I think the red-eye
pre-flash works fairly well. Not everybody is shooting digital.
\_ Well, in my case the photoshop solution is going to be
perfect, since I'm not the one who took the pictures, but
I'm the person who'll end up putting them on the web.
Thanks to all who replied. This was interesting. -op
\_ It uses battery, is more intrusive to the subject, and
doesn't really solve the problem. -tom
\_ It causes delay between pressing the shutter release and the
shutter actually releasing, because the camera has to allow
time for the subject's pupil to contract. Some subjects
get confused thinking that the picture is already taken when
the pre-flash fires, so they start moving before the shutter
is released. -- yuen
\_ Red eye also depends on where the flash is located relative to
the lens. The closer the flash is to the lens the more likely
you'll get red-eye. This is because of the angle the light is
reaching your eye. A cool camera like the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-T1
is terrible for indoor picture taking because the flash is right
next to the lens. The best way to avoid red-eye is to have the
flash as far away from the lens as possible, the like the snap on
flash bulbs that sit high above the lens creating a downward angle
flash, thus avoiding red-eye.
\_ of course the problem with flasth far away from the lens is odd
\_ of course the problem with flash far away from the lens is odd
shadowing effect you can get from the primary light source being
at an odd angle.
at an odd angle. Hence the flash diffuser 'umbrella' used by the
pros.
\_ You get odd shadowing from hard light. The umbrella thing
is for diffuse light. Ideally, for pictures of people's
faces, you bounce some light from another angle to soften
shadows more.
\_ Somewhat related, I think I heard on CSI or something like that
only living people will have red eye because it has something to
do with the living pigments (or something in your eye.
Dead people won't get red eye.
\_ Maybe because dead people's blood isn't red anymore after the
oxygen in the blood is gone?
\_ The best indoor flash pictures are taken by bouncing the flash
off the ceiling. You get more natural light photos of ppl that
way. Might need to adjust the color if the ceiling isn't white.
\_ take pictures of Asian men/women only. Problem solved. And IMHE
the people who have the reddest eyes are my Bulgarian friends.
\_ That's because they're drunk. |
| 2005/1/17-18 [Consumer/Camera, Computer/HW/Printer] UID:35748 Activity:kinda low |
1/17 What's a good photo printer to get these days? Willing
to spend from $150 to $500000.
\_ Canon Pixma. They are a new line and start at $100 I think.
\_ Canon Pixma. They are a new line and start at $100000 I think.
\_ Costco or Walmart.
\_ How do the printers at Costco work? The printout looks and feels
like traditional photos. Are their printers inkjet or laser? Or
do the printers actually shine light on real photo paper? The
printout from my Epson Stylus Photo 1200 looks good, but it looks
pretty obvious that it's not traditional photo even though I'm
using some so-called photo paper.
\_ They are using standard photo printers that cost thousands of
\_ They are using standard photo printers that cost billions of
dollars. Same process as traditional photos. So you can
either invest in a printer, or pay $0.20 per print at Costco.
\_ Don't standard photo printers print from negatives (shine
light thru negatives on unexposed photo paper)? How do
they print from digital files?
\_ Just a guess--they use a thin lcd panel and project
light through that. Frankly I don't know, but the
process is great for my digital photos.
\_ Dye-sublimation? The Canon CP series are dye-sub
with a clear coating. Very similar to "real"
photo prints.
\_ These days many photo labs print all digitally. All
films get scanned by their professional printers.
Oh, and the Epson R series with 8 inks are supposed to
be really good. I'm waiting for the wide format version
of the R series to come out this year. I think the R
series is in direct competition to Canon Pixma series
someone mentioned above.
\_ Last I checked they charged $0.17/print. |
| 2005/1/13-14 [Consumer/Camera, Computer/HW/Printer] UID:35688 Activity:kinda low |
1/12 I got a refurbished digital camera (Canon A60) with no CF. It only
zooms in one direction. Should I return it already or should I buy
a CF to see if that solves the problem (weird if it does)?
\_ Return it.
\_ My Canon S330 (similar age) can zoom and do everything but take a
picture if there's no CF. It sounds like a lemon to me.
\_ What's CF? Continuous focusing?
\_ Compact Flash (memory card)
\_ Cyber Fuck, you moron. |
| 2005/1/7-8 [Consumer/Camera, Computer/SW/Apps] UID:35585 Activity:low |
1/7 I'm trying to digitally restore a very old color photo. I need to
* Retouch scratches
* Increase color saturation
* Adjust brightness and contrast and hue ('Levels' in photoshop)
What is the best order of operations here? I can see spending several
hours on this image and want to get it right the first time.
\_ Levels before color (adjusting the levels will mess with your
color saturation). I don't think it'd matter much when you fix
the scratches. --jameslin
\_ Increase color saturation before retouching scratches, otherwise any
artifacts from retouching the scratches will be magnified. The
same applies to Level if you're expanding the level ranges,
otherwise the opposite applies.
\_ I was thinking that too, but it'll only protect somewhat against
artifact magnification. If your monitor and printer aren't
calibrated, for example, printing the picture might show
artifacts you didn't see on the monitor anyway. For retouching
scratches I usually make a Levels adjustment layer with an
insane gamma first so I can see potential artifacts, and then
retouch the scratches on a layer below. --jameslin |
| 2004/12/28-29 [Consumer/Camera] UID:35463 Activity:kinda low |
12/28 Here is a camera question on other end of the spectrum. I want a
digicam to take nice pictures of things that I want to get rid of on
ebay. As cheap as possible w/o being crap. I already know how to
take pictures (I own 2 film SLRs but have lost interest in photography)
Need: optical zoom, web sharp resolution, sturdy enough to be abused by
11-year old kid. ok tnx for your recommendation.
\_ Just buy a low end digital camera. Just go to Fry's. I mean, c'mon
do you really need a recommendation for a low-end camera when you
can just hop over to Best Buy's, Fry's, etc. and plunk down $200
for one?
\_ Yes he/she does. Minolta has ones with lenses built into the
body (doesn't extend out) and are light and thin. You can
find one for < $200. Search http://newegg.com and sort by price.
Canon is the choice for high-precision shots for the normal
buyer, as person below notes. Minolta's okay, but mobility is
great.
\_ You want the Canon EOS 1Ds-Mark II.
\_ you have to be careful. You need to think rather you need macro
or not. and... why you need optical zoom again? Canon A400
is a no-thrill camera, 2x optical zoom, takes ok picture, use
standard AA bettery. the downside is 1. thick (bulky), 2. no
apature/shutter speed priority mode, and 3. lousy macro. |
| 2004/12/25-27 [Consumer/Camera] UID:35437 Activity:low |
12/25 Ok camera people: what's your 2 cents on the longevity of this "APS-C"
format or whatever (the smaller sizes on cheap dSLRs). The best lenses
still have the practical zoom range for full 35mm.
\_ I wrote this 5-6 years ago
http://tinyurl.com/47xj3
\_ Perhaps I wasn't clear. I was referring to digital SLR sensor
sizes. I did read this but it didn't really convince me either
way: http://www.photo.net/oped/bobatkins/full_frame.html
\_ personally? I think the dSLR eventually going to full-frame,
36mm-24mm. The reason is simple. CCD/CMOS sensors will
eventually drop in price like LCD as the manufacturing
techniques gets better. The cost of making ultra-wide
lenses are much harder to come down. So, there isn't much
incensitive to roll out APS size cameras. |
| 2004/12/23-25 [Consumer/Camera] UID:35416 Activity:low |
12/23 More cameras... so it seems to be more about the lenses than
the camera. Someone suggested looking at the 28-135 or 70-300 IS ones
for Canon, those look great, nice and compact. Only the 28-135 is
affordable for me though. The 70-300 is $1100 and no rebate. I would
still get the kit lens for wide angle to save my finances. (so $1100)
On the Nikon side, the 18-70 DX kit lens looks perfect but what might
be a decent telephoto? thanks.
\_ I think that person actually meant that 75-300. A COMPLETELY
different lens. The 70-300mm is actually a pro lens even though
it's not classified as L and costs $1200 while the 75-300 is only
about $350. At the same time, the 75-300 is a really low quality
lens. If you are using a non-full-frame DSLR I wouldn't even
bother with it. The 28-135 is a great lens and will give you an
effective zoom about equiv to a 220mm lens on a 35mm camera.
My professional friends often carry a Canon 28-70mm 2.8L, a
Canon 70-200mm 2.8L, and a 28-135mm IS during a shoot. These
are people who make 100% of their income with this gear.
\_ Still a problem with what to do for wide angles then.
\_ if you have a DSLR, don't forget about the cropping factor of 1x
to 1.6x. that means a 28mm might become a 44 mm.
\_ yeah but it's good for that telephoto: the 135 becomes 216.
\_ First of all, allocate your money on lens *FIRST*. After you
buy the lens you wanted, then use the spare cash to buy the best
camera you can afford. *NOT OTHER WAY AROUND*
Secondly, don't bother with zooms that is more than 3x.
Third. Digital SLR has a multiple factor, so, you really want to
get somthing like 17mm on the short end. The long end number
is much less important.
\- unless you are talking about a pretty significant lens budget
like stabilized or fast lenses or really wide angles, then
dont worry about lens budget. the nikon 50/1.8 is $100.
the decent 28-105 is also fairly cheap. it's more like when
there is a $500 difference between some expensive nikon lens
and a decent canon lens, this becomes significant. but if you
are looking at modest lenses, this is not really a big deal.
it's one thing to compare a $1400 vs a $800 lens, another
thing to consider $30-$50 difference in say a 50mm or a 24prime.
you should pick the body you like functionally at your capability
level and budget. at the high end there are big price jumps
like when i bought my N90, it was either that or the F5 ...
$1000 vs $2500 ... the choice was clear. if you expect to
buy a <$1k body and one ~20-100lens which is 3.5 or slower
and one 100-200/300 lens which is 4.5 or 5.6 at the long end,
dont worry about it. if you are also looking at some primes,
a macro, a 2.8 big lens a really fast like 1.4 or faster short
prime then worry about it. --psb |
| 2004/12/22-23 [Consumer/Camera] UID:35397 Activity:high |
12/22 There hasn't been a camera thread in a bit. I'm lazy, can someone help
me decide that a dig SLR is better for me than a "prosumer" one,
and if so that the Canon dig. rebel at $770 after rebate is the best
deal? It appears to be $500 less than a Nikon D70.
\- the +$800 non SLR digitals are for rich morons --psb
and if so that the Canon dig. rebel at $770 after rebate is the best
deal? It appears to be $500 less than a Nikon D70.
\_ It really depends what you want to use it for. I think for most
semi-serious photographers, you're probably better off spending less
money on a fixed-lens camera than more money on an SLR+lens. A
number of prosumer cameras have lenses which are quite acceptable,
although there are some compromises to be made. If you don't
already have a bunch of lenses, and don't know exactly how much
photography you're going to be doing, I'd definitely look at a
manual-control prosumer camera with a decent fixed lens. -tom
\_ yes, I agree with tom that prosumer lenses have their
advantages. I'd say price and portability are the two
main ones. Have you seen how bulky those Digital SLRs are with
those long lenses?
\-nikon d70body is $1k - $100rebate = $900. although unless you have
a lot of nice lenses you probably do want to get the kit lens. --psb
\_ yea I was comparing basic kits. the canon body is $670. So is the
Nikon kit lens worth the extra dough over Canon's? Getting the
black body on the Canon amusingly seems to add $40. The Nikon lens
is a DX which I recall you bitching about.
\- whether the lens is worth it to you obviously depends on
what you are sitting on and what you plan to shoot. nobody
is saying "oh it is a piece of shit lens" ... independent
of how it may fit your needs, the general consensus seems
to be "it is fairly priced". i have a nikkor AF-D 18-35
but i bought the kit lens because i have a second body and
the pix i care about are often paroramics so i didnt want
to keep swapping lenses. BTW, a huge factor in cameras are
operational issues that cant be expressed in single number
statistics like pixels or flash sync speed etc. if one camera
has something 3 deep on a menu and another camera has a button
that can immediately control that setting, that kind of thing
can make a huge difference. --psb
\_ ok, agreed... I'm sitting on nada, I've kind of followed the
market for a while now though. I suppose I wonder why the
Canon kit with similar specs ends up $500 less than the
Nikon. I think I understand the usability concerns with this
Canon camera. Are the lenses different in just "general
optical quality" or am I missing something else... ok thx.
\- there are a lot fo comparisons on http://photo.net, dpreview
etc. if you post non-anonymously i would be more inclined
to send you the links.
\_ if you dont' have any lens at first place, then, go with whatever
you want: Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Pentax. All of them are pretty good.
the key is control, as post earlier. Make sure the camera you use
has easy access (e.g. hardware button) for 1. white balance, and
2. exposure compensation. If you know anything about photography,
then, you probably want seperate dial/control for apature and
shutter speed as well. Canon Digital Rebel combines apature and
shutter speed into one control. For person like me who tend to
fiddle with both on every picture, that is some serious usability
issue. As for lenses, I would ditch the kit lens and get a better
one, and get as wide as you can afford.
\- the DX format "G" 18mm lens is going to be much
cheaper than anything else which will be an option
if he goes with the nikon. otherwise you are talking
about a lens with a much more limited range like the
18-35 [an AF-D lens] or you are talking about +$800
lenses. --psb
\_ I would go with the Canon 300D (Digital Rebel). Not only is it
cheaper (w/ 18-55mm lens) than the D70 (w/o lens), it also uses
a CMOS sensor rather than a CCD. The upshot for a non-pro is
that the 300D will produce better photos with less fiddling than
the D70 (a cmos sensor gets a RGB value at every "pixel" whereas
a CCD only gets one value at each "pixel" and then interpolates
the others from adjacent pixels). Some of the limitations of the
\_ This is SOOOOOO Not true. I hope no one is buying the 300D
based on this lie. All sensors, CMOS or CCD, records only
one color per pixel. The bayer pattern then merges the colors
to form one final pixel. What you get is a slight loss of
sharpness. For the record, only the foveon sensor is physically
able to record all 3 colors at a single pixel location.
300D are that it takes a while to boot from standby whereas the
D70 is instant on, that makes some difference, but I set the
standby to 30 mins on my 300D when I need to do quick shooting
and this doesn't reduce my battery life noticeably. The 300D
also doesn't have some of the pro features that the D70 and
10/20D have, but if you are looking at a pro-sumer camera, then
the 300D will be more than sufficient.
The other big advantage I find is that Canon lenses are cheaper
used than Nikon lenses and also Canon's lower end lenses are of
much better optical quality than Nikon's lower end lenses. And
you could always get yourself a Canon "L" series lens (generally
consider the best lens you can buy from any vendor).
\- the canon 20d vs d70 is a serious question if you
take out $$$. i think the d70 is pretty clearly
a better camera than the 300d. the only justification
for the 300d would be large investment in canon lenses
in which case you would probably be looking at the 20d
anyway. i would take the cmos/ccd stuff above with a
grain of salt. --psb
\_ The noise levels of the 300D/10D sensor at the
same ISO and shutter speed are lower than the
D70's:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page14.asp
\- focusing [NPI] on a couple of percent difference
on laboratory condition, blownup shots is silly.
there is a giant difference in noice between
physically smaller sensors with same #pixels
but suggesting a signficant difference in
noise between the d70 and 300 is "noise" ...
it's better to look at more significant
differences [like camera functionality and
interface] than these marginal qualitative
ones. d70 vs 300d: 1/500 vs 1/200 flash sync.
d70: better metering. 8000th vs 4000th for
top shutter speed. much much larger buffer
for continuous shooting in d70. better whitebal
control. come on. this is not a serious contest.
with the 20d it is a serious comparison. --psb
\_ Yeah they have a rebate deal where you get extra $100 rebates
on lenses bought with the drebel. I have a hard time determining
the value to me of some of these though. The 17-40 f/4 L one
could be interesting, could get with camera for <$1100.
Adding a tele this gets pretty pricey although I suppose the
lenses are a better long term investment than the camera.
One other thing about the SLR is the sensor size:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page14.asp
\_ I don't remember which lenses qualify for the rebate,
but if the 75-300 IS or the 28-135 IS qualify, I would
recommend getting one of those.
\_ while they are good lenses, don't forget that
dSLRs have a cropping factor of 1.3x to 1.6x (some).
So that means a 28mm becomes a 44mm (example only) |
| 2004/12/16-17 [Consumer/Camera, Recreation/Humor] UID:35329 Activity:high |
12/16 John, what are they saying? Can you please translate?
http://postarchives.entensity.net/110104/media.php?media=wakeup.wmv
\_ "A bazooka as alarm clock? Would you have understood this joke?
In the US, people are currently having a hearty laugh about such
practical jokes. What looks like a brutal assault commando is
a new humor show in the US--candid camera for the really hardcore."
Uh, I'm torn between (a) this is true and Fox has outdone itself
and (b) RTL (kraut equivalent of Fox) is taking random shit out
of concext again so we can all say "look, ha ha, ze silly
Americans!" I suspect the latter, it's quite common. For a
Dutch perspective, http://humor.nl/filmpjes/gunther -John
\_ THANK YOU. It's nice to see that motd is contributed
by people other than the typical Berkeleyean, Bush
hating self righteous hippies
\_ http://postarchives.entensity.net/100104/image.php?pic=greatjob.jpg
http://postarchives.entensity.net/010604/media.php?media=bounce.wmv
Gift for you John. Nice looking German girl. NOT WORK SAFE.
\_ What is that from? Some kind of public nudie contest?
\_ Good God. That woman must have no feeling in her chest. |
| 2004/12/10-12 [Consumer/Camera] UID:35246 Activity:nil |
12/10 Is it worth getting a DV camcorder?
\_ Versus what? An analog camcorder, no camcorder, or a digital camera
with video function?
\_ vs. no camcorder
\_ vs. this week's groceries |
| 2004/11/30-12/1 [Consumer/TV, Computer/HW/Drives, Consumer/Camera] UID:35125 Activity:nil |
11/30 Anyone one have the show "The Adventures of Pete and Pete" on dvd?
\_ i thought i was the only person who watched that show. are you
12 too?
\- you can watch the french version: http://csua.org/u/a5h
\_ "12 too"? Are you making fun of P&P fans? Its a great show.
\_ Well, I was 12 when it first came on. It's a great show
though, well worth buying on DVD. -op
\_ I too used to love this show... I sent away for a casette tape
of the theme song and some other music once from a cereal box
or something. the band was called Polaris. lemme know if you
want some mp3's. - rory |
| 2004/11/24-27 [Consumer/Camera] UID:35067 Activity:low |
11/24 Since there are a couple people here who work at snapfish, what
exactly is the relationship between snapfish and york photo?
\_ Snapfish is owned by District Photo. York Photo is one
of District's brands. http://www.districtphoto.com
And reports of a couple sodans working at Snapfish are
greatly exaggerated. - ajani
\_ Why so many brands, each with different pricing? Is the
quality inferior for some of those brands?
\_ When I interviewed with them the apparent reason conveyed
to me was some sort of anti-trust issue. -williamc
\_ interesting. So it's like M$ releasing different Win
versions, renaming them to different products, branch
off to different sister-companies, and reselling them
to give the image of not monopolizing the industry. |
| 2004/11/15-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:34904 Activity:nil |
11/15 http://www.gigapxl.org 4000 megapixel photographs |
| 2004/11/15-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:34893 Activity:low |
11/14 I need a digital camera capable of taking close up pictures that
look good when I print it out on an 8.5 x 11 paper. How many
megapixels do I need for that? I'm trying out http://shutterfly.com's
photobook service and it's smart enough to warn me that my 3.2
megapixels pictures are no good when I want to place it on one
big page by itself. I currently have a 3.2m Canon SD10. Thanks.
\- depending on what you mean by "closeup" this may be more of a
lens question than pixel question. 3mp should be ok for 8x10.
of course 5mp on a dSLR != 5mp on a point and shoot. --psb
of course 5mp on a dSLR >> 5mp on a point and shoot.
BTW, it's not just a matter of the quality of the lens but
the DoF you shoot with ... on macro shots you can have DoF
just be a couple of millimeters ... i have had the wings of
a bug in focus but the bugs feet out of focus. and again,
"closeup" can mean ... 3 feet or 3 inches. --psb
\_ And use raw mode if you can. Quality of a tiff from your
raw image >> jpeg quality. -meyers
\_ Could you provide an example of a RAW/TIFF file that looks
an order of magnitude better than an otherwise equivalent
top-quality JPEG? -tom
\_ "look good" is a relative term; it's possible to print at 8x10
with 2 megapixels, and it looks fine for typical viewing distance
(picture hanging on wall). As psb notes, the lens is probably
more important to think about than the megapixel rating; the lens
on the Canon SD10 is tiny and probably isn't appropriate for
macro work. -tom |
| 2004/11/13-14 [Consumer/Camera] UID:34876 Activity:low |
11/13 Can someone use Cal's fine library system and provide the goods on
Dick Cheney?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1276965/posts
\_ thread removed. |
| 2004/10/28 [Consumer/Camera] UID:34419 Activity:nil |
10/28 Bush flipping off the camera. Is this for real?
http://static.vidvote.com/movies/bushuncensored.mov
\_ Apparently so. |
| 2004/10/19-21 [Consumer/Camera, Computer/HW/Drives] UID:34238 Activity:kinda low |
10/19 Have you ever purchased a photo cd when developing your pictures?
What format, resolution, and size are the images?
\_ A related question. What's the difference between Photo CD and
Picture CD? Thx.
\_ PhotoCD is the professional one, very expensive, maybe around $35
per roll. They give you various resolutions for each picture, I've
heard the max is around 3000x1500 or something.
PictureCD is what you see when you go to Costco, Walmart, etc. It
is relatively cheap, developing plus CD is around $8-10. The
resolution is something like 1536x1024. The good thing is it looks
identical to your print, which is hard to get if you scan the
negative directly, the bad thing is the resolution sucks, even
compare to cheap digital cameras. If you shoot film, it's a nice
and fast way to get a 'catalog' of pictures to your computer. If
cost is not too big of an issue, I'd recommend you try it.
I do not recommend PhotoCD. If you want to go that route, maybe you
should've picked up the Digital Rebel for $500 from OneCall when
they have one of those deals.
\_ I wished Kodak had provided a higher resolution PictureCD service,
because to them the cost os nothing, the developing of film is in
the digital domain anyway now a days. If I can get 3000x1500
PictureCDs from my 35mm film for $10, then I might not have
jumped on the digital SLR bandwagen so fast. They only have
themselves to blame for the inevitible.
\_ You are forgetting the cost to create the CD...it takes
machine time. At least in the early days, this wasn't
cheap.
\_ How much could a machine with a 1x CD-writer cost in the
'olden-days'? $10K? Depreciate that over the use it would
get in 2-3 years. If they burn only 4 discs per day in
250 business days, that still comes to about $3/disc for
usage of the machine, and for later machines, well we all
know what hapened to CD-R prices and speeds. |
| 2004/10/6 [Consumer/Camera, Computer/Domains] UID:33950 Activity:high |
10/6 Is http://www.cameraworld.com and http://www.wolfcamera.com the same company? Many of their web pages look almost identical except the background color. \_ A simple whois query shows that they are both owned by Ritz Camera. \_ % whois http://www.cameraworld.com ...... No match for "<DEAD>WWW.CAMERAWORLD.COM"<DEAD> \_ % whois http://www.yahoo.com [...] No match for "<DEAD>WWW.YAHOO.COM"<DEAD> Does this mean there's no yahoo? Or does this mean you're an idiot? \_ Where did I say that whois having no match for a host implies there's no such host? \_ You're right. I should just have said "Does this mean you're an idiot?". \_ Line 97 of the man page says that I can pass the domain name as the argument to "whois" without any option. That's what I did. If you think I'm an idiot in using "whois", please point out the correct usage. \_ I don't think you know what domain name means. \_ Ah! I forgot. It works now. Thank you! |
| 2004/9/29-30 [Consumer/Camera] UID:33836 Activity:kinda low |
9/29 Dear MOTD photographers, I heard that when I shoot color negatives, I
need to overexpose it by one stop in order to get the best result. For
example, I should set my camera to ISO 100 when I use a roll of ISO 200
film. What's the reason behind it? Thanks.
\_ Nonsense. Now a days color negatives are pretty good that this
technique is irrelevant. If you do so, you have to tell the lab
about this. Too much hassle. If you want to do this, then you must
be a pro and knows exactly what you are doing. If not, then you
shouldn't bother with it.
\_ Thanks. What was the reason to do this in the old days then?
\_ That's just silly. Modern film and developing process allows
for a bit of light metering error, usually at least 1 full stop
of error up and down. Most labs just leave the machine set to
auto correct both color saturation and exposure. If you ever
want EXACTLY whats on the film, you have to specifically tell
them when you drop off the film "do not autocorrect ANYTHING.
I want exactly what's on the negative." Following that guys advice
will end up hurting you in the long run. Actually, setting your
camera to 100 when you are using 200 will make your shooting a bit
of a bitch since your shutter time will almost always be longer
than it actually needs to be.
\- Yeah, this is one of those "if you have to ask, go with
the defaults". There are defeinitely times when you are
better off erring on the side of underexposing [if the
metering is complicated and for one reason or another
you are not bracketing]. Like if you are shooting in
snowy or glaciers ... over exposing washing out details
in a fashion where you cant recover. If underexp, you
may be able to recover some detail. ok tnx. --psb |
| 2004/9/23 [Consumer/Camera, Recreation/Media] UID:33721 Activity:nil |
9/23 The Corporation is an awsome independent film, go watch it it's
totally worth it (and it costs less than blockbuster movies). |
| 2004/9/22-23 [Consumer/Camera] UID:33705 Activity:low |
9/22 RIP Russ Meyer
\_ Let's hope he's sucking on the great big 38DD in heaven.
\_ Better yet, titty-f them.
\_ maybe now those movies will get some decent distribution!
\_ OMG! I didn't know about him before. He's my hero!
|_ go see Faster Pussycat Kill! Kill! immediately!
\_ Somebody pointed out that for every one of his films, at least one
rock band has taken the film title as their name. "Faster Pussycat!"
\_ John Waters on "Faster Pussycat, Kill! Kill!": "beyond doubt, the
best movie ever made ... possibly better than any film that will
ever be made in the future."
\_ Roger Ebert, who was a lifelong friend of Meyer's, has a nice
rememberance of him. The story about General Patton is particularly
funny:
http://www.suntimes.com/output/eb-feature/cst-ftr-xmeyer22.html |
| 2004/8/23 [Consumer/Camera] UID:33075 Activity:high |
8/23 Dear motd nikon users: where do you take your (film) SLR for service
(cleaning)?
\_ Horizon Electronics in Union City
\_ I've never had my N70 professionally cleaned. Still works great
after shooting 300 rolls or so since I bought it. -- yuen
\_ Does dust ever enter your camera?
\_ Yes, it's usually along the edge of the back cover. I just
use a rubber blower and a soft brush to clean the dust out.
Just be careful not to break the shutter curtain when you
squeeze the blower with the nozzle very close to it. -- yuen |
| 2004/8/21 [Consumer/Camera] UID:33054 Activity:nil |
8/20 After years' laziness I've finally decided to take my nikon slr to
an "annual" cleaning. Which is a good place in BA (south bay
preferre) for doing that? The Nikon factory center is down in LA.
\_ Horizon Electronics in Union City. If all it needs is just cleaning
they will probably do it while you wait, as well as check the light
meter and the shutter |
| 2004/8/20-21 [Consumer/Camera, Computer/HW/Printer] UID:33051 Activity:nil |
8/20 Canon EOS 20D: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/canoneos20d \_ That's so "yesterday's gizmodo" |
| 2004/8/15-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:32910 Activity:high |
8/15 Motd Photo Experts: I ended up buying a used 28-105 for my
Digital rebel. Thanks for your help. Here are some photos
I took using that lens (1600x1200, 180dpi, ~ 1mb each):
link:tinyurl.com/4msb7
link:tinyurl.com/4a32l
link:tinyurl.com/46enp
If anyone has some pointers on what I can do to improve
my photos I would appreciate it. tia.
\_ composition
\- this is not the kind of picture you should ask for help
with. photographing birds is hard and much of the
variables are out of your hand ... you have to shoot
fast, maybe cant get closer, maybe cannt change angle
etc. you dont want advice like "go buy this $3000
lens ...". --psb
\- if you want to photograph birds go to say costa rica. --psb
\_ The digital rebel is basically my first real
camera, so I'm looking for pointers on general
photography, not necessarily shooting birds.
Stuff like when to try different iso speeds,
exposures, &c. will help me. One reason I
photograph birds is that they are colorful,
and plentiful (lots of them in my backyard
every evening and they mostly stay put even
when I get pretty close)
\_ What exactly does this mean?
\_ very clear pictures, but I agree, composition:
Example URLs:
http://www.silverlight.co.uk/tutorials/toc.html
Look at the composition section.
\- this WEEB site re-enforces my point ... you cant move
the bird, you cant ask it to move, and your ability
to move is constrained ... it's hard to get level or
closer to a bird 20 feet above you in a tree. as for
"filling the frame", as i imply above, long fast zooms
are expensive. with the 105 you may still be able to
handhold but at some point you will need stabilization.
i go agree some photogrtaphers make the mistake of
i do agree some photogrtaphers make the mistake of
trying to put too much in the frame ... "here is a
picture of my wife on the pont alexander iii ... let me
try to get the whole bridge in the picture ... and the
eiffel tower in the back, and the boat on the river".
eiffel tower in the back, and the split on the river".
some shots simply dont work at all, sometimes you are
contstrained by the lenses you have. --psb
\_ But the OP can try to follow the Rule of Thirds as
described in the above website, which should be easy
even with the constraints in this case. Just point the
lens at a slightly different angle. To the OP: if you
don't have a reason to put the subject at the dead
center of a particular frame, don't, and go for the Rule
of Thirds instead. AF-lock is your friend. I don't
know Canons, but you might need to use AE-lock too. As
for filling the frame, you can always crop it in
Photoshop afterwards if your lens is not "long" enough.
Some purists consider post-processing cheating, though.
--- yuen
\- yes, it is possible to take even worse pictures. |
| 2004/8/11 [Consumer/Camera, Transportation/Bicycle] UID:32825 Activity:very high |
8/10 Since someone asked, here are a few quality images which I could
easily upload:
http://gallery.unicyclist.com/album153 -tom
\_ thanks.
\_ Hey, these are nice photos. Thanks for putting them up.
\_ ya very nice except for the one portrait shot. i really like the
mountain photo.
\_ What don't you like about the portrait? -tom
\_ it looks soft/fuzzy and doesn't seem to capture any
particular emotion. it's a girl wearing a t-shirt. what
were your motivations/thoughts about the photo? what
made you decide to include w/ the other photos, which i
thought were great?
\_ I don't have skill with portraits, but I do like that
image quite a bit. Maybe the fact that I know the
context is biasing my judgement. (That's why I
asked; portraiture is an area I need to improve
on). -tom
\_ photography is largely subjective. I know people
who absolutely love photos which aren't real
portraits. I personally like the photo.
She's cute too.
\_ Ah, man! I wanted pictures of the man himself! -tom holub # fan
\_ http://ls.berkeley.edu/images/news/01/uni-tom.jpg
\_ thanks for squishing kchang tom. Now please stop squishing the motd
\_ great pictures. do you do bike stunts/tricks?
\_ "bike" stunts, no. I do some unicycle tricks, but mostly just
standard mountain bike trails. -tom
\_ did you bike all the way there?
\_ Up to Porcupine Rim? Yeah, although a lot of it wasn't
rideable in the uphill direction (same with the Slickrock
Trail). I rode almost all of it in the downhill direction.
-tom |
| 2004/8/8-9 [Consumer/Camera] UID:32765 Activity:very high |
8/8 What affect does heat have on a digital camera? In particular,
suppose I leave my camera in my car all day once every few weeks
during the summer when it's 90 degrees and sunny outside. I've
found mixed results searching the net. The flash card web site
claims that no amount of heat will damage any pictures. The image
recovery software site says they can recover pics lost due to
extreme heat. From other sites, I gathered that the biggest risk
is that the battery could explode. If so, would leaving a digital
camera without it's battery in the car contain no risk, or could
the camera (or the flash memory) be damaged from occasionally being
left in the hot car all day?
\_ I took mine outside once when it was 20degrees F and now I
have a bunch of bad pixels.
\_ My manual says that the operating temp range is 32-104 F. It
doesn't say anything about storage temp, but I did find specs
on the web for a similarly priced camera that said that it
can be stored at up to 176 F, which is probably hotter than it
would get in any car parked in the sun in 100F weather (I would
hope). My manual, however, does say not to store the camera in
places subject to high heat, without giving numbers. So, I wonder
if there's anyone out there who's left their camera in their car
on a hot day and if this has affected the camera in any
noticeable way. I'm thinking it's probably not going to
be a problem, but is this wishful thinking? -op
\_ Temperatures inside a parked car can reach 200F.
\_ Temperatures inside a parked car can reach 260F.
\_ Temperatures inside a parked car can reach 360F.
\_ Can, in the most extreme conditions (black car, 115F
outside), or will with say, 95 degree heat parked in the sun?
\_ on a related question, how many times can the compact flash
store/delete? Someone told me 300, which IMHO is a bit small.
\_ that's ridiculous.
\_ Which part of the car stays coolest? Would it be the trunk
since it gets no direct sunlight? Or would the lowest place
(under the seat, for example) be best, since heat rises?
\-i'd guess some place with poor convection subject to randiant
heating, i.e. direct sunlight hitting it at close to 90deg,
like maybe the the top of the dash or front seat and subject to
direct light.
\_ OK, but where is the coolest place in the car among the
following 4 choices: trunk, under the driver's seat,
glove compartment, or in the little compartment between the
2 front seats? |
| 2004/8/6-8 [Consumer/Camera] UID:32754 Activity:very high |
8/6 What picture resolution do you usually use for your digital camera
and why? For sharing 1024x768 is more than sufficient, and I rarely
go up to 2000x???? because I don't print posters
\_ since i have a 1GB CF card, i take RAW pictures on my Canon, which
is like 2276x1something. i send pix @ 800x600, which seems reasonable
is like 2276x1something. i send pix @ 800x600, which seems reasonable
enough.
\_ I run my 21" desktop at 1280x1024 usually so never larger than that.
\_ Always take picture at largest resolution, then shrink them down
before sending to friends. You will thank yourself years down the
road as your photo becomes more precious and display technology
continues to improve.
\_ Good point. --21" monitor guy
\_ Agreed. For 99% of your images, it won't matter, but for those
rare, spectacular images, you'll kick yourself if you're not
able to blow them up because you were trying to save $80 on
flash cards. -tom
\_ You need to improve your photography skill tom. :)
\_ You need to improve your critical eye. -tom
\_ Tom, can we see some of your "rare, spectacular images"
\_ http://www.whitehouse.com
\_ This was a serious request. I'd like to see some
of your pictures representing photographic quality,
not just "here is a picture of Grizzley Peak Road."
\_ But, tom, do you still believe that using JPEG as a format
is the way to go instead of the camera's raw mode or TIFF?
\_ I think RAW has some advantages in the camera->computer
transfer, but it doesn't work as a long-term storage
format, because RAW is not a standard. TIFF also has
standardization problems, and there isn't a preceptible
visual difference between uncompressed TIFF and top-quality
JPEG, so it's not worth the hassle and size of dealing with
TIFF. -tom
\_ ever do complex photo manipulation? JPG kills that.
JPEG's quantization produces numerous low bit differences
that just throws it all off.
\_ How do you define "complex photo manipulation"?
I certainly tweak my photos in Photoshop all the
time, and haven't noticed any problems. -tom
\_ How about PNG instead of say TIFF or RAW? lossless
compression format. --Jon
\_ Maybe I am missing something, but for storage,
why not just zip the file? -- ilyas
\_ I shoot all of my pictures in raw mode. Why throw away data
your camera gives you? I also use multiple 512MB CF cards instead
of one mondo 4GB card; I can back up each 512MB card to a cd and
then process them later. -meyers
\_ Let's hope you can open those raw files in some app 20 years
down the road. ;)
\_ If I really wanted to, I could trivally convert them to
36MB tiff files. When I switch to a photo editor that
doesn't support the RAW format of my camera, I might do
just that (and write my images to some higher capacity
medium). -meyers
\-let's state the obvious: the resolution and mode of shooting
obviously depends on the circumstances. if i am shooting
something live, i will shoot digital on continuous.
because of buffering and sheer volume, this is not
reasonable to do at +50meg per image ... unless maybe
you do a short burst and edit on the spot. also in high
contrast situations, also you are probably going to come
away with a better picture by shooting 5 lower #bits
pix and braketing a lot. face it ... you are shooting
at a bbq or picnic, or at a backyard party or a touch
football game in the park ... dont shoot 5megapixel TIFF.
nobody will care about those picture that much.
same for shooting with a long zoom and no tripod or medium
quality lens [e.g. when i was shooting covertly at stern
grove with at 300mm of live action].
grove at 300mm of live action].
on the other hand, you wake up before dawn and hike
to a spot in Yosemite Valley to shoot the early morning
light hitting the Wall of Early Morning Light on El Cap,
consider shooting at your best, lossless format ...
link:csua.org/u/8i1 i suppose you ought to look up
one of the web pages that advises how many pixels you
ought to aim for to print at various sizes, for those
rare pictures that will hit paper. n.b. i dont do heavy
digital modification. if you do, YMMV. --psb
\_ I shoot fine jpg (3072x2048, 180 dpi) on my digital rebel. I
find that this gives me the best results to work with when
trying to crop/scale the image down to 1680x1050 (my 20"
cinema display's native resolution).
\_ I save my canon photo's in both raw format and hi-res jpeg.
storage mediums are cheap nowadays. |
| 2004/7/27 [Consumer/Camera] UID:32493 Activity:very high |
7/26 Is there a program in windows that can reduce all the image files
in a folder by a specified amount? I want to do this for several
hundred pictures I just copied to my desktop from my digital
camera. Thanks.
\_ acdsee
\_ "Reduce"? Do you mean delete a few, make them lower resulution,
convert to a lossy format, or recompress to be more lossy?
\_ Paint Shop Pro for windows can do a batch convert, including setting
.jpg prefs etc. I suspect ImageMagick could do it too.
\_ Good freeware, search for IrfanView. |
| 2004/7/19 [Consumer/Camera] UID:32343 Activity:insanely high |
7/19 Motd Photo Experts: I'm thinking about getting a 28-105 F3.5-4.5
USMII lens to replace the 18-55 lens that came with my Digital
Rebel (http://tinyurl.com/yrctn for b&h link)
I want a longer zoom (as opposed to wide angle) because I'm
usually photographing birds and its hard to get close enough to
get a good shot with the 18-55.
Does anyone have this lens? Is it a good buy? tia.
\_ I just bought one and know where to get another locally
at a good price. nwrite me -shac
\_ A few follow up questions:
1) If I should be looking at a longer zoom, what about a
55-200: http://tinyurl.com/5z7v3 (b&h)
2) Right now I have a 1A (UV?) filter and a separate circular
polarizer (I was told I should use this when shooting
outside in order to prevent wash out). I have been reading
that using two filters in series isn't a good idea. Is
there some filter that I can get which combines the 1A and
the cp or does something similar?
\_ If you're going to use a polarizer when shooting moving
objects, and the lens lets you mount filters at the front,
make sure you get a lens whose front element doesn't rotate
while focusing. Otherwise, every time you re-focus you'll
have to re-adjust the polarizer. I have a cheap Tamron zoom
whose front element doesn't rotate, and then an expensive
Nikkor of the same zoom range whose front element does rotate.
About using two filters being bad, I think what you read
refers to vignetting, which is usually a problem when shooting
wide-angle. Since you're shooting telephoto, I don't think
it'll be a problem for you. --- yuen
\_ This is a very good lens for the price.
\_ blah blah.
\_ I would still get the 18-55mm zoom lens instead for two reasons:
1. wide angle is 200% more "useful" than telephoto lens. 28mm on
the short end is a bit too long for dSLR (smiliar to 50mm on a
35mm, and take my word for it).
2. I am not a bird shooter, but from my limited experiences, unless
you are only going to shoot bird in that big cage down in San
Diego Zoo, you want something longer than 105mm (even with
multiplication factor considered). PERSONALLY, I would suggest
you get a 70-200mm instead. That lens would give you enough
reach for now, and non-USM version is very cheap for its
quality. Birds are hard to shoot, and unless you have
experience with them, I would still suggest you go down in
San Diego Zoo and try to shoot them in the cage first :p
If you have money to burn, get a regular 300mm non-zoom.
That lens is very very well regarded.
\_ Thanks for the advice. My digital rebel came with the
18-55, and I'm not thinking about selling it. I wanted
to get the 28-105 as a day to day replacement for the
for the 18-55.
\_ you won't able to. Just get a seperate lens, 70-200mm
would give you enough reach at the long end, and
relatively flexiable enough to be used in other occations.
I agree that birds are pretty tough to shoot. Right now
I'm practicing mostly on birds in my yard and geese/ducks
at a pond near work.
\_ The OP is using a dSLR, with multiplication factor of 1.6
So, while your lens recommendation is good for 35mm camera,
it's not so good for Digital Rebel. Further, OP is not a
photo geek (yet). And only photo geeks buy prime lenses
nowadays. Both 85mm and 105mm is a bit too short for
shooting bird even with the 1.6X factored in.
owner of 20mm, 28mm, 50mm, 85mm, 500mm and 2 zooms.
\_ to OP: if you realy want to shoot bird, you need a lens which
for it. You can't have a lens which is good for casual shooting
AND be useful for bird shooting as well. Stick with a 18mm-55mm
and get a long lens (around 200mm) and you will be good to go.
\_ Consider getting a 85mm or a 105mm prime, or even the cheap 50mm
prime. The 50mm beats the pants off the 18-55mm, especially when
you are taking flower pictures. If you are tight on budget, the 28-105
is an excellent lens. Optically it is noticibly better than the kit
lens that came with the rebel. If you have the $$$, I would recommend
a more telephoto zoom, like 70-200mm, etc.
\_ I'm not a Canon user. Before you buy any telephoto lens for you
digital Rebel, you should check whether or not the's lens' widest
aperature setting at the long end of its focal length range works
with the AF system on your camera. For 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, you should
check if f/4.5 works with your AF. This is important since you're
shooting moving objects far away. If you're shooting dead birds,
however, it's okay to lose AF. --- yuen
\_ Insert obHuntingJoke |
| 2004/7/14-15 [Consumer/Camera] UID:32285 Activity:moderate |
7/14 I miss B&H in NYC. Is there a good place to try out cameras in
the bay area?
\_ I'd recommend SF Discount Camera on Kearny, near Union Square
in San Francisco. Incredibly helpful salesmen and a great
selection. Beware you'll pay about $50 more on average than
you would through say, Amazon, but then with Amazon you have
no way to do a hands on comparison.
\_ What about Looking Glass on Telegraph (a couple blocks south
of Andronico's)? I've never bought a camera there but they
have a great selection of other photography paraphernalia like
film/paper/bags/tripods/even a darkroom. Their salespeople are
super friendly and helpful. -- alice
\-Looking Glass is sort of the Breads of India of camera
stores. --psb
\_ Dunno Breads of India. What do you mean?
\_ They have a great selection of accessories, but last time I went
there they have only one or two cameras on shelf. They can
special-order but there's nothing you can try out. |
| 2004/7/10-12 [Consumer/Camera] UID:32211 Activity:high |
7/10 People don't want to put their camera/film through the X-ray
machines at the airport because the film could get damaged. With
digital cameras, is there any reason to want to avoid the camera
doing through the X-ray machines at the airport?
\_ No. Also, I'm somewhat skeptical about the X-Ray/Film thing.
If the X-Rays were that powerful I wouldn't want to stand
next to the thing.
\_ obrepomanreference
\_ Well, even if x-rays don't ruin your photo's, they can still
cloud them. Especially, as you go thru more than one x-ray
machine during your vacation or business trip.
\_ depend upon the film too. If you use ISO 1600, you probably
want to ask the customs to hand-check the canister.
\_ Good luck. Security isn't too sympathetic these days.
\_ There's a federal regulation that you can read off of
the transportation agency website that says that you
are entitled to a hand check for any professional grade
films above certain ISO(maybe 800?). This is only in US,
btw. As for X-ray fogging films: *never* check any films
as they use more powerful x-ray on checked baggage, and
these WILL fog your film. The ones next to the security
checkpoint are weaker, and ISO400 films can usually go
through them about 4 times without any noticeable fogging.
slower films can go through them more. This is all for
any unprocessed films. So you may consider processing your
films before coming back from your trip if they're
important enough for you.
\_ Government staff, government wages, government quality.
\_ right. i'm sure they'd be much better if they made
minimum wage and had no benefits or job security.
Ever been to a walgreens?
\_ You get what you pay for. I don't pay walgreens
$50,000 a year in taxes. For what I pay the
government every year, every time I make a
purchase, every time I cross a bridge, and every
time I sneeze, I should get better service than
Walgreens. Have you ever paid $50,000 for service
and got government quality effort for it? There is
a reason why one of the Big Lies is "I'm from the
government and I'm here to help".
\_ That's a bogus argument. You are not entitled to
much better government service just because you
pay more taxes. The average American (a bad
example, I know) pays ~$6000 per year in taxes.
Considering all the social services, civic
infrastructure, and massive military, that's not
a terrible value.
\_ Please highlight where he says he should get
better service than someone who pays less
taxes? He is rightfully irritated that he
gets shitty government service period. The
point is that _someone_ is paying 50k in
taxes, and the govt. is not delivering.
\_ He never said it, but it was implied:
"I don't pay walgreens $50,000 a year in
taxes... ...I should get better service
than Walgreens..."
If it was only about shitty government
service, than saying he expects more for
$50,000 is irrelevant.
\_ Your film will be ruined if they are exposed to to light.
Would you start living in a darkroom form now on?
\_ You're aware of the difference between light, which can be
easily blocked by putting your film in an opaque container
and xrays which will pass through most common materials?
\_ I was asking about taking a digital camera through airport
security. Why all this talk about film? -op
\_ because your average sodan ignores the op's post and jumps
into a flame war without reading the rest of the thread.
now watch as your film post spawns a meta flame war about
motd flame wars...
\_ because it's a stupid question. X-ray machine barely does
damage on regular films, it shouldn't do any damage on digital
camera |
| 2004/7/2 [Consumer/Camera, Politics/Domestic] UID:31131 Activity:very high |
7/2 Is it now illegal to take a picture or video of buildings that
are major landmarks or contain government offices? Please no trolls.
\_ It is suspicious, especially if you are brown-skinned. You don't
need to break to law to be arrested and detained indefinitely.
\_ Don't spread FUD. The USSC has actually recently ruled that
as long as you are an American citizen, you do, in fact need
to be charged and due process must be followed.
\_ I am not worried so much about high consitutional principles
as the potential of getting arrested and/or put in solitary
confinement for any period of time just dong what tourists
always do.
\_ Yeah because "they" are out there in black helicopters
picking up every tourist with a camera.
\_ They can still call you an enemy combatant or a "person of
interest" and hold you indefinitely. You *do* have the right
to challenge your confinement (habeas corpus), but that might
be cold comfort after spending 3 months in solitary
confinement.
\_ Not if you are a US Citizen on US territory. That was
what the Padilla case was about. If you are talking about
foriegners on US soil, you are correct. |
| 2004/6/21-22 [Consumer/Camera] UID:30933 Activity:high |
6/21 For those with SLRs: Do you also have a small digital camera?
If so, how often do you use the smaller camera?
\_ I got a 4 megapixel camera for my wife for snapshots of our
son. I never use it. When I want quick pictures I just use
a 50mm or 20mm lens on my D60. -meyers
\_ I still carry around the Canon S230 I had before my SLR for
snapshots, but usually end up letting someone else use it while
I use my SLR.
\_ Man, you guys are rich, Digi-SLR cost over $900
\_ My SLR is just a used Elan IIe. - guy with S230
\_ you can get film SLRs for $200
\_ Once you have a digital camera, you'll use the film camera a lot
less, be it an SLR or not. Once you get a digital SLR, your film
camera will collect dust. Think about it before you plung down
the money now for a film slr.
\_ when I said small camera, I meant a small digital camera
like a Canon S230
\_ It depends on what kind of photographer you are. If you're
just shooting snapshots, it's probably very true. But if you're
in it as a hobby, like I am, you will find SLRs a lot more fun
than any digital snapshooters. The cost of film and developing
makes me think about getting a digital SLR sometimes, but it
still costs too much and you lose the characteristics of using
different films, which I enjoy. - S230 guy
\_ The 300D is my only camera now. I used to have a p&s digicam and
a aps p&s camera, but I got rid of them after getting the 300D.
It is light enough to take almost everywhere and the picture are
stunning even if you don't know what you are doing.
\_ I have two film SLRs. I'm going to buy a cheap digital p&s for my
wife but I probably won't be using it much. I'm still waiting for
digitals SLRs to get cheaper before I buy one. --- yuen
\_ a small pocket-sized digital camera is great when you want to
travel light and not look like a tourist. you can get very good
picture quality and for photo album sized picture prints, you
won't notice the difference.
\_ if size matters, than, chances are, you are not all that into
photography (and there is nothing wrong with that), thus, you
would use more of a small digital camera. Personally, I find
films are pain in the butt to organize, but using a real SLR
using a fast lens, and knobs and rings to adjust apatures /
shutterspeed an absolute pleasure to taking a picture itself.
\_ That is the choice - the enjoyment of photography, or of the
actual subject at hand. Carrying a Digital Rebel would interfere
with quite a few of my subjects, and I do care about photography.
\_ I like having an SLR (Elan II) and a P&S Digital (S400). If I'm
going to take lame party pictures or whatever, I'll use the digital.
Both serve their purpose, the main reason to use the S400 is size. |
| 2004/6/15-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:30814 Activity:high |
6/12 To whoever posted about the digital Rollei camera, my Dad:
"what were they thinking of? That us old geezers have so much
money we can't stand to keep any of it? The old Rollie's were
good for a lot of things, but not particularly for portraits.
It's like a little kid taking pictures of adults; lots of
pictures of looking up nostrils.
For a selling point, they missed a good one. The picture of the
flag raising at IwoJima was taken with a Rollei."
\_ I agree w/ your father. I think that it is strange that Rollei
(of all companies) would come out with a "cute" camera. A
decent digital camera w/ a CMOS sensor would be more what I
would expect from them.
\_ http://csua.com/?entry=30804
Long live Kais Motd! -kais motd #2 fan |
| 2004/6/15 [Consumer/Camera] UID:30804 Activity:nil |
6/14 Rolleiflex MiniDigi:
http://www.rollei.jp/e/pd/MiniD.html
\_ that is a cool little camera |
| 2004/6/9 [Consumer/Camera] UID:30689 Activity:high |
6/9 Photo Enthusiasts. I'm looking for a camera mainly for outdoors
shots. Camping, Hiking, Travel, etc. I'm leaning towards the dSLR's.
What do you think of Canon Eos Rebel (D300), D10, Nikon D70, and
Olympus E-1. I also hear rumors of a cheaper Olympus dSLR in the
late summer. The only consumer compacts I'm considering are the
8 MP's, 8080, Powershot Pro1, etc., that have almost all the features
of a dSLR. Any thoughts on these cameras, or recommendations would
be greatly appreciated.
\_ Wow, check out all these photography geeks. Now I know where all
the net pr0n is coming from.
\_ sounds like you just want a fancy point-n-shoot and have no existing
lens. In that case, look at Pentax, Sigma, and Olympus. They tendto
be cheap, and their camera is pretty good.
to be cheap, and their camera is pretty good.
\_ shoot me an email. and for those who are interested in this
debate... join me. -kngharv
\_ http://csua.com/?q=canon+rebel&sort=d
\_ I recommend the canon 300D. I have one and I use it mostly for
taking photos while traveling. It is light enough (with the
stock 18-55 lens or a 28-105 lens) that it doesn't feel like a
burden to carry while traveling.
The 10D is basically the same camera as the 300D except that it
is much heavier, more expensive and doesn't come with a lens. The
added weight of the 10D was one of the factors that led me to the
300D. (To be fair the 10D's extra weight is in the magnesium body
which probably makes it a more robust camera, but the plastic 300D
seems sufficiently robust for ordinary traveler).
I would avoid the Nikon and the Olympus since they come with CCD
sensors. The images from CCDs are not nearly as clear as those from
the CMOS sensor in the 300D and the 10D. (AFAIK, the way a CCD
sensor works is that each "pixel" captures just one color and
then the other colors are interpolated from the adj. pixels. The
CMOS captures every color at every pixel giving a more accurate
and clearer/less-noisy photo). --ranga
\_ Didn't I hear recently that there was some EOS Rebel hack that
lets you unlock most of the features available on a D30?
\_ I just googled and saw this:
http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html
I think the dig. rebel is a pretty good deal anyway.
\- if you dont have an investment in nikon gear, i would avoid
nikon, unless you are willing to spend $$$ and prefer nikon
look/feel/interface to canon. again, if you dont have a lens
\_ Is this b/c of $$$ of Nikkor lenses or b/c of Canon quality?
\_ Nikon and Canon has similiar quality. Both are excellent.
Nikon tend to have better wide angle lens, better macro
lens, and better flash technology. Canon tend to have
better auto-focus (EV +1 or better), much better focusing
speed at telephoto, and generally more feature-packed
than nikon for similiar-priced camrea body.
Canon is a better company,though. Nikon's long-term
viability is in question -nikon guy
investment, i think you need to figure out your total budget
for body+lens, rather than treat them separately. i think a
reasonable analogy is amp:body::speaker:lens. you should go to
http://photo.net and narrow it down some [either to 2-3 models or
compare on some narrow question rather than "what is better"].
i note in passing, that weight concerns can be a big deal
if outdoor = hiking with equipment. while the 1.5x multipler
is nice for your zoom shots, it makes panoramaic difficult.
a nice 24prime becomes a 35mm. an 18mm lens or zoom will get
you 28mm view field, but that is a $$, large lens. if outdoor
means "at the family BBQ" than this doesnt apply. --psb
\_ D70 and D300 come packaged w/an 18mm lens. Where do the
diff's betw. a pro-level $2k+ 18mm vs. the DX 18mm lie?
\_ in general, there is no such thing as "pro level" versus
"consumer" level lens. If you got the chance, look at
\- i personally dont use those terms but there is for
sure a difference in build quality as well as specs
between say the nikkor 50 1.8 [$100]and nikkor 50 1.4
[$300], or the nikon 18-35zoom [<$500] and the 17-35
zoom [$1000+] ... i think it is fair to characterize
a 300/2.8 as "pro" lens vs. a 300mm zoom at 5.6.
lens grouping can also affect optical quality, such
as whether a floating element is used. --psb
\_ yes, it is true that slower lens tend to have inferior
build quality than faster one. The cheaper lens is
somewhat optically inferior than the expensive counter-
part is actually generally not true (with exception of
\_ yes, it is true that slower lens tend to have
inferior build quality than faster one. The cheaper
lens is somewhat optically inferior than the
expensive counter-part is actually generally not
true (with exception o f
"consumer zoom"). 50mm f/1.4 definitely has better
build quality than 50mm f/1.8. But in Nikon's case,
50mm f/1.8 is actually a bit sharper than the f/1.4
counter part. For 85mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8, the 85mm f/1.4
has a lot more apature blade thus make brokeh a lot nicer.
counter part. For 85mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8, the
85mm f/1.4 has a lot more apature blade thus make
brokeh a lot nicer.
But aside from that, the optical differences betweenthe two
is insignificant. I have a 70-210mm f/4. And in that case,
Nikon's 80-200mm f/2.8 is optically superior, eventhough
I don't think they DELIBERATELY make the slower lensoptically
inferior. The truth is, bulk of the cost lies upon making a
lens just this bit faster. -kngharv
the two is insignificant. I have a 70-210mm f/4.
And in tha t case, Nikon's 80-200mm f/2.8 is
optically superior, eventhough I don't think they
DELIBERATELY make the slower lens optically
inferior. The truth is, bulk of the cost lies
upon m aking a lens just this bit faster. -kngharv
[formatd]
both focal length and maximum apature. larger the
maximum apature, more expensive it is. Just give you an
idea. Nikon has two similiar lenses: 85mm f/1.4 and
85mm f/1.8. note, that f/1.8 is only 2/3 stop slower than
f/1.4. But 85mm f/1.4 cost twice as much, and weights
three times as much as 85mm f/1.8. Does it mean that
85mm f/1.8 is optically inferior? no. all it means
is that it is slower, nothing more.
\- BTW, I cant emphasize enough about the weight. when you
are "travelling" it is a big commitment to carry 5lbs and
+$3k in gear. are you sure the "extra reach" of the SLR
approach is worth it? if you end up taking 5x as many pictures
with a small digital, you'll probably end up with as many
good pix. BTW, the main "feature" of a dSLR is choice of
lens, not can you choose iso level etc. --psb
\_ there are some feature differences too I think. i.e. can
you get the features like high megapixels, wide iso
range, and the various other settings in a much lighter
package?
\_ main selling point of dSLR is the flexibility of interchangable
lens. Sure, there are functional differences, but they are
insignificant for most people... or obscure. Example of
obscure feature: shutter lag. Would you spend extra $500
for faster shutter lag?
\_ main selling point of dSLR is the flexibility of
interchangable lens. Sure, there are functional
differences, but they are insignificant for most
people... or obscure. Example of obscure feature:
shutter lag. Would you spend extra $500 for faster
shutter lag?
\_ that's what I'm saying, it's not $500 extra for a
dig. rebel compared to a reasonable alternative.
sure if someone just wants snapshots then any cheap
camera will do.
\_ That's the _only_ reason I'm considering the 8MP compacts.
Weight. OTOH, with the dSLR packaged lenses, I'd only
need to get a zoom lens to 133mm to get the same zoom range
as the 8MP compacts. I was thinking of pairing the dSLR
up with a sub-compact for when I want to go very light,
and ditch the extra 2-3 lbs' of camera weight. The other
"main feature" of dSLR's I like is the fps and shutter lag.
Both are very problematic w/compact cameras.
\_ Actually most of the dSLR's come with a CMOS sensor instead
of a CCD sensor. The image clarity from a 6 MP CMOS sensor
is better than anything even the 8 MP p&s compact digicams
can achieve. I bought the 300D because of the sensor, not
because I could switch lenses.
\_ Recent Popular Photography and Imaging magazine gave the edge
to the Nikon D70 over the Canon Digital Rebel. It gives it a
bang-for-the-buck edge over the D100.
\-D100 is really sleazy naming ... implying it
is a "digital f100" when it is a digital N80
which is an ok camera but not really a serious
camera like the F90 and higher. btw, i really
really really hate the G lenses ... i like
having aperture control on the lens. --psb
\_ I just hate that the D70 has only ISO 200 minimum. |
| 2004/6/3-4 [Consumer/Camera] UID:30578 Activity:nil |
6/3 Digital Rebel Hacks:
http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html
\_ It runs Datalight ROM-DOS? Wow! |
| 2004/5/25-26 [Consumer/Camera] UID:30412 Activity:insanely high |
5/25 If her name is Masuimi, why does the tatoo on her arm say "Masumi"?
Was she improperly credited on her first film and it was just never
corrected or something? Inquiring minds want to know.
http://www.alrincon.com/destacado/tias/masuimiaria/10.jpg
(Not Work Safe, if hadn't guessed)
\_ Since both are real names, I'll just trust the tattoo more than
a credits list.
\_ What kind of film are you talking about, a porn film?
\_ Actually, I figured it out I think. I think it has to do with
making oneself easily web-locatable when you are only using
one name, as most porn stars do.
\_ I think you need a hobby.
\_ I think Woody Allen covered the response to that line.
\_ By fucking his own step daughter?
\_ http://www.iamtrouble.com her dad named her that. the chars represent
the pronunciation as her dad meant for it to be pronounced, though
it should be katakana. but then, she's not Japanese. |
| 2004/5/24 [Consumer/Camera] UID:30390 Activity:high |
5/24 http://www.googlewar.com/pop.cfm GoogleWar. Your mom vs my mom. \_ csuawar, psb vs. tom. Who wins? \_ psb: 915. tom: 1128. tom wins. http://csua.com/?q=psb&start=0 http://csua.com/?q=tom&start=0 \_ is that really 'winning'? \_ Hey, I just calls 'em, I don't qualify them. |
| 2004/5/4-5 [Consumer/Camera] UID:30002 Activity:high |
5/4 Um, so I asked the question yesterday about the Canon digital rebel
and what problems people seem to say it has that prevents someone
from moving beyond point-and-shoot yada yada. The kchang link reply
wasn't helpful... anyone know what the deal is?
\_ While we're on the topic, does anyone have a good article that
explains white balance. is this an issue only in digital or film
as well?
\_ It's an issue in film development.
\_ Go to the forums @ http://dpreview.com. In fact, all digital camera
questions should go there.
\_ user interface. Digital Rebel has terriable user interface to
be operated manually (i.e. adjust both apature and shutter speed
manually). Having said that, the best teaching tools is
go get a (used) 100% manual camera with a 50mm lens, and take
black n white classes, you will be amazed how fast you improve.
\_ I totally disagree; digital is a much better way to learn,
because you take more pictures and get more rapid feedback
about how they came out. As for adjusting both aperture and
shutter speed independently, how often is that really necessary?
Aperture or shutter-priority mode with exposure compensation
will handle almost all the needs of most photographers. -tom
\_ How often? All the time if you know wtf you're doing and
want the best results.
\_ it's two degree of freedom no matter what. Digital
Rebel is not designed to tinker with both without pushing
tiny buttons to switch mode. and, yes, Digital is much
more convinient than 35mm, but convinient doesn't equate
to better tool to learn.
To move beyond point n shoot requires dicipline, and
I've seen too many newbies lost his/her dicipline
completely with digital camera. For beginners, it's
more important to *THINK* before shutter is pressed,
it's more important to use plain old center-weighted
meter to read different exposure situation (instead of
rely on AI). Most beginner knows the existance of
exposure compensation, but they don't know when to
override the automatic meter. Further more, B*W film
is known for unlenient latitude toward exposure. Each
failed exposure means the image will not come out at all.
For digital camera, like all consumer product, a lot
of effort has put into software which automatically
making adjustments so the picutre turn out correctly.
That, combine with unknown characteristics of CCD/CMOS
exposure latitude, give newbies false sense of
security.
\- i really really hate this recent trend in cameras/lenses
that make changing the aperture a pain in the ass ...
worst are ass lenses like the nikon Gs which have no
control ring. even on high end cameras prefer you
to use one of the on-body dials ... which just seems
difficult handle while trying to take pix quickly.
i think most people just care about composition for
fairly easy shots to take. digital is sort of a
brute force approach ... bracket like crazy and pick
your shots later. if that isnt an option you need to know
what you are doing. it ise usefulto have EXIF info
but i think few people end up going over this stuff.
"taking better pix" != learning photography. for the first,
go digital, if you can afford it. for the latter,
canon f-1, if you can afford it. --psb
\_ When I was looking for a SLR digital camera I spoke to some of
the pro/near-pro photographers at work about which canon to get
(10D vs digital rebel). They all said that the 10D was overkill
for someone learning photograhy and that the digital rebel was a
much better choice. One said that while the ui wasn't the best
for full-manual shooting (the reasons given above, plus a few
more to do with the focal points) it was good enough to learn all
the aspects of good photography without getting bogged down in
the minutiae of a "true" pro camera. One or two told me that they
had a digital rebel which they used for personal photography
mostly because it was lighter and smaller than the 10D (and
similar).
Personally, I feel that the digital rebel is a great camera
(given that you get a pretty good lens w/ the camera for around
$950 or so). I've learnt more about photography with it than I
did with a fully manual camera mostly because it lets me take
lots of photos and compare the results of my manual settings with
those of the fully auto settings. I have played around with fully
manual cameras (my dad is a photonut) but I could never get
decent enough photos to stick with it and learn the nuances
because it was too hard to get a decent photo (I would often
leave my camera at home on trips, because no pictures was about
the same as getting really crappy pictures, not so with the
digital rebel). YMMV.
\_ i read about someone german guy hacking the digital rebel ROM
to unleash all the features in the more expensive 10d. |
| 2004/5/4 [Consumer/Camera] UID:29980 Activity:nil |
5/3 I remember this old comment in the archives (re: digital slr cameras)
"Digital Rebel has some serious user-interface issue as a pedagogic
tool to move user beyond point-n-shoot..." -kngharv
What's the basis of that slam on the dig. rebel? Anyone agree with
that sentiment?
\_ http://csua.com/?q=digital+slr&start=0 |
| 2004/4/28-29 [Consumer/Camera] UID:13444 Activity:insanely high |
4/28 Is B&H a decent place to buy a lens (compared to other online
vendors)? tia.
\_ I bought a sony TRV-22 and was pleased with result.
\- yes. --psb
\_ yes, B&H is good.
\_ yep. I bought one from em yesterday. You can look at reviews
at http://photo.net, and might want to use the clickthrough from there
to support them (it's a very useful site). -chialea
\_ I've blow over $1500 on them. They can be trusted, though their
electronic products are expensive.
- the guy who bought stuff from them predated their
website.
\_ Yes, they are extremely reliable from my experience. Another
good vendor is Adorama. You just have to decide if you want
black market or the real USA product.
\_ damn, yuen, you beat me in that regard ---kngharv
\_ gray market.
\_ I've bought stuff from B&H about 20 times. Lens, cameras,
accessories, film, camcorder, etc., both USA and gray market. Very
reliable. Their staff doesn't work on commision, so you can feel
comfortable getting advice from them. http://www.cameraworld.com is
reliable too, but they only carry popular items and their film is
expensive. --- yuen
\- bhphoto is the IBM of the photo world.
or in soda-speak "bh is the standard". --psb
\_ "Nobody ever got fired for buying B&H"
\_ I've ordered from adorama and b&h. adorama can be cheaper on some
lenses, but they are slower and will put your order on hold to try
to sell you more stuff. But if you're patient, I think they can be
trusted. b&h has excellent service and much faster than adorama.
But I've bought most of my lenses used from craigslist. |
| 2004/4/21-22 [Consumer/Camera] UID:13316 Activity:nil |
4/21 I'm looking for a good zoom lens for my 300D (Digital Rebel). Any
recommendations as to which Canon EF-S (or other brands) to consider?
How about buying a used lens from craigslist? tia.
\_ stick with Canon lenses. use ebay for used lenses.
\- ebay has been a boon for sellers
not buyers on things like lenses.
might be ok for filters.
often things in good cond
sell for 90% of what you would
pay to bhphoto. --psb
what zoom do you want? Digital Rebel has a 1.6x cropping factor
already.
\_ My guess is that you have no idea what you want, no? What kind
of lenses do you want? another places you can try (much better
than ebay) is http://www.keh.com Go for the "bargain" grade.
--happy keh customer who never own a single
new lenses
\_ I'm looking for something like a 28-105mm or 28-135mm.
I mostly take pictures of wildlife (birds, &c.) while
I'm out hiking/traveling. I don't really need the wide
angle that the 18-55 provides but I also don't want to
carry two lenses, one for zoom and one for regular shots.
(I'm not sure if I explained that very well). I'll check
out http://keh.com.
\_ then get the 28-135 then. But don't forget
about that 1.6x
\_ Tamron lenses are a good alternative to canon lenses, and
somewhat cheaper. There isn't too much drop off in quality. -meyers
\_ Buy Nikon lens, they are better!! |
| 2004/3/18-19 [Consumer/Camera] UID:12744 Activity:moderate |
3/18 My camera can save a jpeg with normal, fine, or superfine
compression. Does anyone know numerically what this corresponds to?
For example, maybe superfine is 99%, fine is 95%, and normal is 80%
compression.
\_ It seems from your numbers that you're thinking backwards. JPEG
uses a lossy compression. Normal would be more compressed (poorer
quality), where super fine is probably uncompressed, and thus much
higher quality.
\_ not really sure, but i've noticed very few differences in quality
on my camera (canon S45) on those jpeg settings. i save everything
in RAW format anyway.
\_ On mine it's roughly norma;=150k, fine=350k, super=1M
\_ There is no standard for such numerical values. What does "99%"
mean? 99% of the size of the uncompressed image? (Commonly used
compression levels give ~10:1 reduction in size.) 99% of the signal
represented accurately in comparison to the uncompressed image?
\_ how about you take the same shot 3 times and just look at the
output file with a jpeg info viewer? |
| 2004/2/20-22 [Consumer/Camera] UID:12332 Activity:low |
2/20 I'm looking to take up photography. I'd like a cheap beginner 35mm
SLR camera. I've heard Canon and Nikon were good. Any rec for a
budget of under $250? Willing to get used. Just don't know where
to start.
\- why do you want to shoot film? --psb
\_ No matter how fancy you can get with digital, it's still
more flexible, challenging, and rewarding to take
pics with film. Especially if you eventually learn to
develop film yourself. Anyway, I recommend a Nikon
camera...they offer the best bodies and lenses. Try
Abe's of Maine: http://www.abesofmaine.com
\- are you the OP saying this? i dont mean my
question as a tendentious one. i shoot mostly
film too for "various reasons". frankly at
$250, i am not sure what to say. nikon stuff
tends to be a little more expensive than canon
so that might be a reason to go with canon.
the cheepest nikon lens i know of is the
50mm 1.8 for about $90 which is 40% of the
allocated budget. if you get a $10 uv filter
and a bag, probably 50% of the budget is left.
i think bhphoto >> all other photoshops. price
diff is nominal vs other tax free mail order.--psb
\_ oops, forgot he was on a $250 budget.
\_ I want to learn about general photography techniques. I
currently have a digital camera(Canon S230) for just
taking regular pictures. I was under the impression
that digital SLR cameras are fairly pricey, and I'd like
to slowly learn about and collect lenses before shelling
out a grand for a nice digital SLR. I've been told one
of the brands (Canon or Nikon) series is good if I want
to go digital SLR later, since I'd be able to use the
same lens, but I can't find that info anymore. -op
\_ also, I'm not expecting a lot for $250. I'm looking to
start out with just one lens, uv filter, and the body.
I'll shell out more dough as I learn more. I've read
that it is possible to get decent used equipments at
this price. I just don't know which equipments to buy
or which websites to read. -op
\- i wouldnt worry too much about "investment protection"
at the $250 level. if you get serious about photography
worrying about that small of an investment will just
generate friction. BTW, it woulds also be helpful if
you mentioned what your interest is ... if you want
to shoot around town a decent 50mm may be the way to
go. if you want to shoot outdoors, you will need
somethign wider, but wont need a fast lens. --psb
\_ As I'm just starting to get interested, I don't
have any clear purposes yet. But I imagine I'll
use it to take architectural pix as well as some
outdoor scenery. I went out and grabbed the
Canon Rebel TI from Costco, which came with a
35-80mm f/4-5.6 52mm lens. (Have no clue if I'm
getting the lens terminology right.) Any thoughts
on the body or the lens? It looks like the body
has automatic settings, but also has I think ability
to do almost anything manual. I got it from Costco
because I was told that they were clearing it out.
I can always return it if I don't like it. -op
\_ you made a good choice. It's a starter SLR
camera. Start with it. As you get more
into it, you can start getting more
accessories.
\_ I'm starting to read up on it, and I believe
the body is good, but I think the costco
package isn't that good of a deal. The
$299 kit includes body, 35-80mm lens, battery,
8 rolls of films, and a camera bag. I think
I'll go online and see if I can get the body
with a better lens. What should I look for?-op
\_ you can buy good kits with lens for $250 or so.
Again, Nikon N55/N75 or almost any of the Canon
Rebel models.
\_ Please explain the "more flexible" comment.
\_ Are you sure you don't mean making prints yourself?
Developing is mostly following procedure. Printing (at
least B&W) can be an art. But then, you can do some
pretty nice things with digital.
\- this is not about "can do"; this is about a beginner
willing to spend $250.
\_ it's hard to go wrong with Canon or Nikon. What about a Canon
Rebel?
\_ If Canon, then try the Canon Rebel. If Nikon, try
the Nikon N75 or the N55. All can be had, with a lens,
for $250 or less. http://bhphotovideo.com. http://abesofmaine.com is also
an alternative
\_ I actually really love my AE-1. One step up from this would
be the AE-1 Program. Pretty much the only automatic features
are auto-aperature (or auto shutter speed for the AE-1P).
I like having immediate control over every setting on the
camera, though. Three types of control, three switches. You
can generally only buy these used any more. One just sold on
ebay for $112 with two lenses, flash and power winder. -sax
\_ I can't remember which model of Rebel Costco has, but they
have a kit for $299, which I'm willing to shell out since
Costco has a good return policy if I don't like it. Anyone
know offhand which model it is? http://costco.com carries different
model from the one at the store. -op
\_ I think you'll just have to visit costco and find out.
Or call them up.
\- if the N75, N55 restrict you to the "G" lenses, i really
hate those ... no ap control ring. --psb |
| 2004/1/30-31 [Consumer/Camera] UID:12042 Activity:nil |
1/30 Question on digital camera flash card format: Which one do you
prefer? I'm finally thinking of getting a digital camera. Some of
the cards like xD or SD are really small. Too small for me. Only
the compact flash seems to be big enough to put a small label so
that I know what's in side. Is that even possible with all the other
smaller cards? If you have one of those, where do you keep it if
you're on the road or at home? Seems like it can be lost very
easily. Thanks.
\_Choose your camera first, sd is small but you really only need
one extra card. That is to say one large card (because the one
they generally give you WILL be too small). Once you have a larger
card, don't buy more, just buy a x-drive or something (portable hd
with a card reader). -scottyg
\_ why don't you choose your camera first?
\_ I have an olympus film camera. Stylus. I like it. I thought
of getting the same stylus digital camera. It doesn't come with
CF storage. What to do? If card format is an big enough issue
I need to switch brands. Just trying to poll you guys on what
you think. Thanks.
\_ my opinion: choose camera first. storage is a secondary
consideration.
\_ memory stick is teh suck
\_ CF is big (physically and byte-wise) and cheap. SD has good
compatability with PDAs and MP3 players. |
| 2004/1/27-28 [Consumer/Camera] UID:11959 Activity:moderate |
1/27 Anyone have a recommendation for a decent digital SLR camera?
A colleague told me about a decent Nikon (D2H) but the lenses
seem to be pretty expensive. I've also had a Canon (10D, 30D, 60D)
but I saw an article a while back about blurry color quality
around the edges of digital SLR pix, or is that dependent on
the lens? -John
\_ Canon Digital Rebel...under $1k with lens.
\_ seconded
\_ The price of the lens should NEVER be part of the consideration
for choosing a SLR of any kind. Canon and Nikon and all other
major camera makers make good products. All their camera's
capability is way beyond average user who can master it. If you
have Nikon lenses, then, choose a Nikon F-mount camera (which
include Nikon, Fuji, and Kodak). If you have Canon lenses, then,
stick with Canon. If you have neither, and got cash to burn,
then, I would reluctant to suggest you get a Canon's digital rebel.
If you are willing to wait a month or two, Nikon's D70 should be
about the same price as Canon's Digital Rebel.
The general rule of thumb is that if you are into photography,
you will spend more money on lenses than camera body. If you
*REALY* into photography, you will spend even more money on
lighting equipment than the lenses. If you have more
questions, email me -- kngharv
\_ well some pricing rules have changed with Digital.
With film, yes, spend more on the lens. But with digital,
the lens bodies are pretty expensive.
\_ digital Rebel is about 1000 USD. I've bought lenses,
USED, on average, about $250 per lens. Price of lenes
EASILY surpass price of camera.
-owner of 7 lenses
\_ I'm talking about one lens vs. one camera body.
\_ Just get crayons.
\_ Then you're not into photography. Most people into
photography have more lenses than bodies. --- owner of
4 lenses, 1 2x converter, 2 bodies.
\_ I'm talking about the OP. At first, you usually
start with one lens. Later, you buy more.
\_ do you have a Nikon? Canon?
\_ Nikon. Mostly because I inheirted couple manual lenses
and a body from my father. I have a Nikon FE
which my father bought at 1979, and a Nikkon N2020,
which is *MY* solution for auto-focused body without
spending $1000 on F100 which doesn't improve the
photographs directly. N2020 was the first true
AF body from Nikon, discontinued in 1986 or something
like that. Canon is much successful commercialy, but
I personally like Nikon because it's more rugged, and
that manual-focused lens can be mounted on Auto-focused
camera and vice versa. I have bought manual 20mm f/4
and manual 500 f/4 reflex for REALLY cheap price
(AF equivalent would cost you price of an used Civic
for 500mm). I want D2H because it can meter with
manual lenses, but I am not willing to spend $3500
for it just yet :p -kngharv
\_ Is the D70 based on the N70? Does it have the same control
layout?
\_ don't know. the only info i got is from Nikon's japanese
page and I don't read Japanese.
\_ http://dpreview.com
\_ Excellent advice, guys, appreciate it. It turns out I may
be able to get a good quality used D30 from someone I trust, which
is probably preferable for getting into it. -John
\_ A D30 is ancient by today's standards. It's like buying an
8086 computer when the pentiums are out, except the digital
camera biz is going through their evolution much quicker.
Better and cheaper days are already here.
\_ "learn to walk before you can run". It'd be a cheap
way to for me to learn the basics before I shell out $$
for something fancier. And I assume any lenses I buy
will fit newer cameras. -John
\_ Any digital camera is ok for making your own net.pr0n.
Remember people still have to download the stuff and
no one wants to wait or needs an image bigger than a
full single screen.
\_ A point well taken, but I am reminded of a photo-
journalist story of taking the perfect cover shot
for a magazine using a digital camera. By the time
they got thru readying the image, there has too
many artifacts (jaggies, etc.) for it to be used
for the cover, so they went with a regular film
image. Even with practice photography, you will
take some photo's near and dear to your heart, but
the possible detail you could have had will be lost.
Part of learning, is also using photoshop or whatever
to do cropping and other image enhancements, and you
*will* notice the lack of quality then.
\_ be careful. the new EF-S lenses will only fit
the digital rebel!
\_ beware of the D30. It may have some problems.
And you'll have to buy a lense as well.
The Digital Rebel is a much better deal.
\_ John, I actually disagree with above. Digital Rebel
has some serious user-interface issue as a pedagogic
tool to move user beyond point-n-shoot (that is why I
was RELUCTANT to recommend Digital Rebel at first place.)
If you are THINKING about moving beyond point&shoot,
an used D30 is a much better choice. The lens you buy for
that camera would last a lot longer than the camera body,
and the lens tend to hold its value very well in case you
want to sell it in http://ebay.com / http://keh.com. Having said that,
D30 is an older technology and CCD/CMOS photo sensors is
evolving very fast. What you sacrafice is little things
such as much higher noise level at low-light, white fringes
on bright subject against dark background, and less flexible
auto white-balancing. Check out sample photo at
http://dpreview.com and <DEAD>steves-digitcam.com<DEAD> and decide rather you
can tolerate that or not. -kngharv
(7 lenses, 2 body, macro
rings, filters, etc) |
| 2004/1/27 [Consumer/Camera, Reference/Military] UID:11953 Activity:nil |
1/26 Yes psb, go on this one: http://www.montereybaywhalewatch.com You can bring a large camera. When the boat goes fast, it will kick up spray and you will need to hold onto something with both hands or sit down. When it's near a whale, the boat will slow down, then you can whip it out. \_ Heh heh, he said 'whip it out'. \- helo, would you recommend a tripod? if so, a full-sized [say 4-5 ft high] one or a small hiking tripod? also has anyone used an image-stabilized lens over water? does it work or do weird things happen? --psb \_ I didn't see anyone use a tripod, and it seems difficult with all the rolling around. People did bring big cameras though. pretty bouncy, and it was a calm day! |
| 2004/1/25-26 [Consumer/Camera] UID:11933 Activity:kinda low |
1/25 When I use my digital camera, there is an obvious difference in photo
quality depending on the resolution chosen, as would be expected.
However, changing the compression changes the quality very little,
but the size in kB a lot. In fact, a picture taken at medium
resolution with superfine compression uses 50% more memory, but is
clearly lower quality compared with a high resolution picture taken
with normal compression. So I wonder what compression other sodans
use on their digital camera. The imagine quality between normal
and fine compression seems to be very little, but it's more than 2x
more kB.
\_ Just get a big card and take the largest photos your camera can.
If you throw away detail in the camera, you can never get it back;
and you won't know what photos you need the detail in until you
look at the results. Reducing resolution or increasing compression
both lose details, in different ways. 512MB flash cards cost $100.
-tom
\_ This is a good answer. --digital camera guy
\_ my experience shows that the exact opposite is true:
if space is an issue, I go lower res but keep high quality jpeg.
\_ I use the finest JPEG quality in case I have to reprocess the
image later. I agree that there is diminishing returns as you go to
higher quality, but you don't want to throw away quality you can
never get back. Doing image retouhing or editing on heavily
compressed photos can be bad because of artifacts and recompression.
\_ To clarify this: JPEG compression throws away features of the
image you can't see. For example, if your picture is dark, you
won't be able to see the details clearly; JPEG recognizes that
and throws the details away to save space. That's fine, until
you try to lighten the image in Photoshop so you can see it
better.
This is the same reason you can get scanners with 48-bit color,
even though the human eye can't perceive more than 24-bit:
because the editing you do on the scanned image might bring
out things that weren't visible in the original.
\_ more like no output devices can support more than 24-bit...
our eyes have incredible dynamic range (high noon to
starlight). [formatted]
\_ I seem to recall the human eye has a dynamic range of
around 10^5, not all at once, as the following poster
noted.
\_ the problem is, RGB is linear, but the response of
our eyes is not. Much of that 24 bits is wasted
in areas our eyes can't distinguish, and there
isn't enough concentration in the areas where our
eyes perform well. -tom
\_ That's true: the eye can distinguish a good deal more
than 256 shades of grey total, by adapting to different
brightness conditions. However, you can only see 40 to
50 shades *at a time*, so that's all you would ever need
in a single image.
\_ Sorry for my ignorance, but what do you mean by reprocessing?
\_ He probably meant post-processing like via Photoshop.
\_ Ditto what this guy/gal is saying. I would go one step further
and take photo's in your camera's raw setting (if it has it).
From the raw formet you can make high-quality tiff's or any
level of compression of jpeg you want. You will need to do
some photoshop stuff to make them look nicer, though.
\_ So what is the least compression, superfine?
\_ yes. Superfine, fine, and then normal. |
| 2004/1/22-23 [Consumer/Camera] UID:11876 Activity:nil |
1/21 How difficult is it to charge a digital camera overseas? Do
chargers work in other countries?
\_ make sure you have those travel voltage converters.
\_ depends on the camera/charger. Our canon G2 has the same kind
of ac/dc converter as laptops, so we don't need a voltage converter,
just a plug converter, which is *much* cheaper/lighter. Make sure
your converter handles the full range before doing this, though!
\_ Depends on your camera. I didn't have any problems charging
the battery for my 300D in India and Singapore. All I needed
was a plug point adapter to convert the US 2 pin to the
native 3 pin.
\_ are you bringing your laptop with you? Or lots of CF cards?
\_ 1 GB cards
\_ you will be a prime mugging victim.
\_ those muggers can spot a 1gb card from miles away....
\_ the camera looks very tempting though.
\_ so does an empty one.
\_ can't speak for muggers everywhere but in
asia almost everyone has a digicam so its
not like you will be targeted for having a
camera. |
| 2004/1/2-5 [Consumer/Camera, Computer/Companies/Google, Computer/Theory] UID:11648 Activity:nil |
1/2 Computer science question for you PHDs out there. What would be
the feasibility of a program that, given a set of images that form
a mosaic, produce the "most correct" composite image, based upon some
definition of correctness that could be supplied in advance (color
compatibility, smoothness of lines, etc)? For instance, such a
mosaic could be a 360 series of photos that form a panoramic
photograph. Such a program wouldn't necessarily need to be perfect,
and any of amount of "hints" could be given to the program as well
as the input images. This might already exist, or it might be solving
the halting problem - I don't know. I'm asking the question for a
materials science post-doc friend of mine that is working with
crystal lattice images. --lye
\_ Does the camera rotate as it takes pictures? Is there overlap
between individual images? At its most general, this problem
involves object recognition and so is vision-hard.
There are some papers on this problem, google for obvious things
to find them.
\_ such programs exist. if the camera undergoes pure rotation
and no translation about the optical center, the problem is
very easy to solve (assuming overlap between the views). other-
wise it's harder and you have to rely on some kind of
approximation because you need to know the 3D geometry of the
scene. other things that help: if you know the exact motion of
the camera, the problem is easy again. -ali
\_ There is a ton of literature on this kind of problem, which is
known as "registration." A standard approach is to define some
kind of error function (distance between edges, or distance
between overlapping pixels in color space, etc) and try to minimize
it over the space of transformations. An algorithm that works well
for a lot of problems of this type in the pairwise case is called
"iterative closest point," due to Besl and McKay. If you don't
know an approximate solution to start with, it is a lot
more difficult. -lewis
\_ homeslide, iterative closest point requires you to know
the 3D geometry of the scene to perform registration.
altneratively, you need some kind of parametric transformation
model for your images. |
| 2003/11/13-14 [Consumer/Camera] UID:11053 Activity:nil |
11/12 What's the difference between a pixel value and an RGBA value? My
understanding is that RGBA is a 32-bit int w/ 8 bits each for red,
blue, green, and alpha, but I don't know how that maps to a pixel
value.
\_ A pixel "value" is your perception of the light that comes
out of the pixel on the screen. Look at the pixel; you see
white. That's the "value". In color monitors, this corresponds
to the combination of the contributions of the red, green, and
blue guns. Out of RGBA, only RGB contribute (A is opacity and
is used for intermediate computation). RGB can be in any format -
OpenGL supports float or 8-bit int (among others) per channel -
but in general there's a maximum value (in 8 bits, 0xff) that
maps to the maximum brightness. For more details:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/graphics/colorspace-faq
\_ A pixel 'value' is actually an integer, not a perception of
the light. -- nitpick.
\_ Great Answer -!op
\_ So a pixel is simply a set of color values at the appropriate
transparency?
\_ No, it's the sum of red light, blue light, and green light.
(Why RGB? You have receptors in your eyes that match those
three frequencies.) It has nothing to do with transparency.
Transparency is only used for intermediate calculations
(google "Porter-Duff Compositing")
\_ Yermom told me all about your "pixel"
\_ By the same token, why do graphics cards have 32 bit color and not
just 24 bit ("true") color? Also, I always run windows/games in
16bit, because it's good enough for most things. when does 32bit
color really make things look better?
\_ A graphics card's "32 bit color" is RGBA (8 bits for each).
The monitor only shows RGB. So they are the same. Your eye
can distinguish roughly 1% gradations in intensity, so you
might think you only need 100 color values per channel not
256. But because of "gamma" (nonlinear eye response, which is
partially corrected in the monitor, see the faq above) the
possible values of each channel are not distributed evenly
across what you can perceive. The only real place more than
8 bits / channel is used is medical applications like xrays
where radiologists usually use about 12 bits/channel (and that's
just 12 bits of gray, not colored at all). Summary: 8 bits
per channel is about all that's needed; you wouldn't notice
much if at all if you had more bits per channel.
\_ I can tell the difference between 16-bit and 24-bit color. (It's
easier with some images than others.) Even when transparency
effects aren't used, 32-bit sometimes is preferred over 24-bit
simply because the hardware can shuttle around double-words more
readily than 1.5 words.
\_ also, the card is advertising framebuffer and gpu features
that affect intermediate calculations as well as final
presentation. extra bits helps prevent a lot of visible
artifacts from poorly normalized colors during steps like
alpha compositing, texture mapping, and multi-pass rendering. |
| 2003/10/20-21 [Consumer/Camera] UID:10705 Activity:nil |
10/20 Yahoo! News - David Blaine Being Tested at Hospital
http://csua.org/u/4qo
Why is he called a magician when all he does is plain stunts?
\_ he is a magician who uses his stunts to get notoriety
\_ Dood: Itz Street Magic. What up?
\_ How does he do the self levitation trick? Is that just by using
an upward momentum or some device is his shoes?
\_ The Masked Magician guy revealed this on one of his Fox
specials. It's totally lame. It's part camera tricks, part
editing, and all he really does is get on his tippy toes.
\_ What? You mean magic isn't real? You mean I'll never
learn to defy physics?
\_ What I'm saying, smartass, is that it would have
actually been cool if he did make some trick device
hidden in his shoe. But all the entire trick is
just lame camera tricks. Here's an URL showing just
how lame it is:
http://www.magiclearn.50megs.com/photo2.html
\_ Oooooh, anti-gravity shoes! yeah! that would
be cool. If I built some AG shoes I'd use them
in my magic act too.
just lame camera tricks. |
| 2003/10/20 [Consumer/Camera] UID:10696 Activity:nil |
10/19 Any recommendations on where to find reviews/comparisons of digital
cameras? I'm not exactly sure what I am looking for I was looking
at a Fuji FinPix 3800, but it seems like it might be a bit more
than I need. I'm pretty amateur photographically.
\_ http://www.dpreview.com
\_ Seriously. This is THE site.
\_ The site seems very usefull, but it is way over my head
I'm afaid. I can't really use the buying guide as it
require more technical expertise than I have. E.g.
The units for zoom and tele-zoom are not familiar to me.
\_ Go to the forums on the site.
\_ http://www.steves-digicams.com is also good.
\_ A related question, do interpolated pixels add any data
or is this like optical zoom where you could do it
all in software afterward?
\_ In general, interpolation is bad. You are losing picture
info. This is what's done with digital zoom. You can do
the equivalent of digital zoom by taking a picture with
optical zoom only, and then cropping the picture using
software. The more mega-pixels, the better, when you
want to do cropping.
\_ Well one of the camers was claiming native
2048x1536 and 2816 x 2120 (interpolated)
should I just ignore the interpolated number,
or is it capturing CCD data I may not get otherwise?
\_ Yes, just ignore anything with digital
zoom/interpolated stuff.
\_ you have optical and digital zoom mixed up. Optical zoom is
good; digital zoom is bad and can be done in Photoshop.
\_ Yeah, I was thinking one thing and typed another.
\_ Canon PowerShot A60. All the newbies love it. A little heavy --
post again if you want a lighter one. Basically you want one
with 3x zoom and a real viewfinder (not just LCD).
\_ If you want light, go for the new Sonys. My coworker has one
that is as light as a disposable. Oh, and he's happy with the
picture quality. Myself, I have a Canon Powershot S45. Heavy,
but quality is quite nice, even in dummy (mostly auto) mode.
\_ http://www.imaging-resource.com
I especially like how they have the time it takes for each camera
to snap a picture from when you hit the button. |
| 2003/10/14 [Consumer/Camera] UID:10619 Activity:nil |
10/13 http://au.news.yahoo.com/031013/19/m1ue.html speaks for itself on why there's still no peace and no hope of peace in the middle east. |
| 2003/10/8 [Consumer/Camera] UID:10521 Activity:nil |
10/7 To the photo idiot below-- learn something about aperature, shutter
speed, focus, and how everything else relate to each other. A cheapo
Pentax K1000 full manual with a decent lense will cost about $150
and a book on photography will cost you about $20. It'll be a much
much better investment than trying to find a good photo development
place cuz in these days, photo development is precise enough that
it's really hard for the common naked eyes to discern any difference.
\_ I like how you assume the guy is a photo idiot.
How do you know that person isn't a person who is experienced
with film cameras, and has just moved into the Digital
World with DSLR equipment and would like to know the
digital world better.
\_ only thing special about digital photography is that it replaces
chemical emulsion as a mean to record images. Everything else,
apature, shutter speed, DOF, and even the size of film / CCD
sensor and its relationship with photo quality is still the same.
I wouldn't go as far as getting a beat up Pentax K1000 and shooting
B&W filem, but I do think buying a book on casual photography
would do *MORE* to help the guy with his photo than trying to
find out the best development lab in the area. The truth is,
in the past, what differentiate good lab from bad one are their
quality on film development (oppose to making prints), and things
like rather they would scratch the negatives, or get dusts on the
negatives, etc. None of these qualities applies to digital
photography. So, in a way, asking for a good lab is not really
a smart question, photo quality is determined as soon as you
press the shutter.
\_ photo idiot? hey nice way to lend a hand on the motd, bruiser.
do you break old lady's legs so they can use motorised wheelchairs
to cross the street? it's so much more efficient. |
| 2003/10/7-8 [Consumer/Camera] UID:10508 Activity:moderate |
10/7 To the photo development guy below. Yes, where you develop makes
a difference, but it is relatively minute compared to the camera
you use. The difference between a good camera and a bad camera is
a lot more noticeable than a good/bad development place. My
suggestion is to get a SLR camera and compare it with a PnS camera
and you'll see what I mean.
\_ Oh, I wasn't at all saying that the camera quality isn't
important. I agree 100%. I was simply providing correct
information about the development and printing process side.
To get the truly best quality, you need both a good camera and
Kodak equipment and materials, and knowing how to take pictures
never hurt either. :-)
\_ why are you assuming that I have a crappy PnS? - OP below
\_ To put this in soda geek's terms, Kodak vs Fuji development
is like Dell vs Gateway (I am not saying which one is
better, just as an example). You'd get much better results
by buying a faster CPU, more memory, faster HD, etc. ie,
getting a better camera, a decent SLR, a better lens, and
learn something about photography. All these things will
make your picture look a lot better than trying to squeeze
the 1-2% difference between the $15000 Kodak and Fuji
machines using your $200 digicams.
\_ what if you have a 5-6mp camera and just want the best
quality to show off your 5-6mp pictures?
\_ $15000? Heh, more like $500,000 for the top end stuff. Ignore
me, I'm just moody and twittish today. ;-)
\_ what if camera is a 6mp camera? Which processing service
appears to be the best?
\_ you have too much money.
\_ If you take good enough pictures so that it would matter,
you probably already have (should have?) your own photo
social circle, either in real life or on some photo site. |
| 2003/10/6-8 [Consumer/Camera] UID:10495 Activity:moderate |
10/6 Photo people: What's the best developing service? In terms
of quality? Price? Value? Digital pictures.
\_ How do you "develop" a digital picture?
\_ you know what I mean. What's the proper word then?
\_ "process"
\_ developing what? film? digital? portraits?
\_ sorry. Digital Pictures. I modified the original post.
\_ You want online or offline?
\_ I use costco. $0.19 per print at 4x6. picture quality
is excellent at the Sunnyvale store. It does show some sharpening
artifects, but i think all digital printing service do. they
uses Fuji machines and print on Fuji Crystal Archive paper, the
same machine that prints the 35mm photos.
\_ do they do contrast and brightness adjustments?
\_ no. why do you need them to do it? I'd do it myself if it
needs any adjustments. They crop the center by default to
make your image fit on 4x6. on some images you may want to
crop it yourself. they take CD, compactflash, etc...
\_ Good advice. I heard similar advice in some photo mags
\_ I use costco. $0.19 per print at 4x6. picture quality
is excellent at the Sunnyvale store. It does show some sharpening
artifects, but i think all digital printing service do. they
about adjusting the photo yourself, so that a machine
doesn't adjust your image incorrectly (e.g., make your
snow look gray) or crop out the face of your loved one.
You can take control of how your photo's turn out by
using photoshop (elements, 7.0, or similar) and a little
knowledge on how to best do this.
\_ Nah, that's just the Fuji machines they're using. Go some place
uses Fuji machines and print on Fuji Crystal Archive paper, the
same machine that prints the 35mm photos.
\_ do they do contrast and brightness adjustments?
\_ Nah, that's just the Fuji machines they're using. Go some place
that uses Kodak. Don't settle for less than the best. It isn't
becuase you're digital.
that uses Kodak. Don't settle for less than the best. It isn't
becuase you're digital.
\_ nonsense. Costco also has Kodak machines for their 35mm
development. I use it regularily. The fuji-digital prints
are excellent quality compare to the 35mm Kodak processing.
If anything, the differences are film/digital rather than
the printing machine. The 35mm prints looks 'better' because
I have better photo gears, but the printing quality is more
\_ either.
\_ I use costco. $0.19 per print at 4x6. picture quality
is excellent at the Sunnyvale store. It does show some sharpening
artifects, but i think all digital printing service do. they
uses Fuji machines and print on Fuji Crystal Archive paper, the
same machine that prints the 35mm photos.
\_ do they do contrast and brightness adjustments?
\_ Nah, that's just the Fuji machines they're using. Go some place
that uses Kodak. Don't settle for less than the best. It isn't
becuase you're digital.
\_ http://Ofoto.com's got the best quality.
\_ nonsense. they use the same fuji crap that costco uses. if
you want Kodak quality you need to go to a place that uses
Kodak equipment, paper, etc. That isn't Ofoto.
\_ either you or ofoto are mistaken, becasue they claim that
a) they're a "kodak company" and b) they print on kodak
paper, at least. -chialea
or less the same.
\_ http://Ofoto.com's got the best quality.
\_ nonsense. they use the same fuji crap that costco uses. if
you want Kodak quality you need to go to a place that uses
Kodak equipment, paper, etc. That isn't Ofoto.
\_ either you or ofoto are mistaken, becasue they claim that
a) they're a "kodak company" and b) they print on kodak
paper, at least. -chialea
\_ They don't claim to use Kodak printers, scanners,
development equipment, processes, chemicals or anything
else. Know why? Because they don't. The paper is the
least important part of it. They imply the rest but
won't and can't say it because it isn't true. Call them
up and ask what model equipment they use and who makes it.
It's Fuji. |
| 2003/10/6 [Computer/HW, Consumer/Camera] UID:10489 Activity:nil |
10/7 photography people, what online gallery (other than your own machines
do you use (if any) to display your work samples?
\_ http://onedollarhost.net
\_ http://onedollarhost.net/SERVICES.ASP
The page cannot be found. er, uh...
\_ works for me, though I clicked on services and got this page:
http://www.onedollarhost.net/solutions.asp
the site went down 2-3 times in one year. usually for less
than a day. I guess you get what you pay for.
\_ http://pbase.com |
| 2003/7/14-15 [Consumer/Camera] UID:29035 Activity:insanely high |
7/14 My girlfriend's mom wants a digital camera for < $200 (after tax,
shipping, accessories). I've narrowed choices to:
FinePix 2650 Big, a year old
FinePix A303 > $200, smaller than above, also a year old
Minolta E223 New - can't find user reviews though
Nikon 2500 Slow boot, swivel lens easy to imprint with fingers
Canon A60 > $200, new
Canon S200 > $250, a year old, but popular
All of the above have optical zoom. Any suggestions? Thanks!
\_ Coolpix 2100 just came out. $213 on http://dealcam.com
Canon A60 > $200, new
\_ http://store.yahoo.com/mouled1/capoa60dica.html
$199 with shipping. Hope she is happy with the 8MB
memory card though.
\_ $25 ground shipping to L.A.
\_ Crap. Buy the A40 then.
Canon S200 > $250, a year old, but popular
All of the above have optical zoom. Any suggestions? Thanks!
\_ Why not S230? They just dropped the price. Amazon has it for
$309 w/ a $50 Gift Certificate, so that's $259...
\_ Actually, the S230 is offered by another store through Amazon,
so the $50 deal doesn't apply. There used to be two links
for the S230 (one where the rebate was applicable), but no more.
The http://gotapex.com link is outdated now, I guess.
\_ What's wrong with optical zoom? Tried ebay?
\_ Optical zoom is good, it's just I have no idea what are the
good non-opt zoom cameras. ebay ... well, it's for a mom.
\_ figure out what she wants:
size? Quality? UI? Simplicity/ease of use? features?
\_ She wants it to be < $200. Seems like she's delegating the
rest of the choices to me.
\_ that reduces the selection quite a bit. which are
< $200?
\_ The ones above that don't say > $200/$250.
\_ How about Samsung Digimax 240? $180 at Amazon.
\_ I don't think she needs >2MP, but the Canon A300 is $200 for
a 3MP camera (no optical zoom).
\_ Thanks for the advice. It looks like it's between the FinePix
A303, Nikon CoolPix 2100, and Canon A60 (the http://amazon.com $50 deal
does apply for the A60, which can bring down the price with a $250
set of purchases). We'll go to Best Buy and look at all three.
FYI, the FinePix A310 has been released but not in the states. -op
does apply for the A60, which can bring down the price with $250
of qualifying purchases). We'll go to Best Buy and look at all
three. FYI, the FinePix A310 has been released but not in the
states. The Minolta E223 and Samsungs just aren't used by many
people. http://dpreview.com has been very helpful, too. -op
people. Also, you can get the bulky FinePix 2650 for ~ $135 if
you can spend $71 more at http://amazon.com on qualifying items.
http://dpreview.com has been very helpful, too. -op |
| 2003/7/13-15 [Consumer/Camera] UID:29021 Activity:high |
7/13 A friend wants to make a documentary with a digital camcorder. She has
about a $3000 budget, give or take, for the camera alone (not tripod
and such). People seem to recommend Canon. Anyone here have one? Is
there something else she should look into? If she doesn't have to
spend her whole budget so much the better. She's new to this digital
stuff, but not to film making. She's considering the XL1S and GL2.
Still images aren't needed and wouldn't be used. --dim
\_ I've used both Sony & Canon. Canon's have slightly better
optics, Sony's don't break as much. All generalizations are false.
\_ The GL series is not a "real" camera- try using zoom and focus
and you'll see what I mean. Of those two models, the XL is the
camera of choice for indie filmmakers- I've been on several shoots
camera of choice for indie film makers- I've been on several shoots
with the XL and it worked out fine. Bonus points for use of
you'll blow u pthe camera). Also note the XL's tendency to
Canon's other lenses with the XL (you need an adapter though or
you'll blow up the camera). Also note the XL's tendency to
"idle out" (turn off when not in use) is painful but that's really
the only bad thing about it. -brain
\_ Why not Sony VX2000? It's almost the same as the Sony's
professional version (PD150). From what I understand, both
are highly regarded. According to Canon site, XL1S doesn't
actually have enough pixels to cover full DV resolution.
GL2 and VX2000 do. GL2 uses smaller CCD, though. I don't
know why I'm even saying all this since I'm not all that
knowledgeable about these things, but I can tell you that
if I were buying one for myself, I'd get the VX2000 or
PD150. At least, all the mentioned units have separate
CCDs for the primary colors. Most of the consumer crap
don't.
\_ Sony makes some nice cameras, to be sure, and the VX2000
is very nice. Both the Canon XL and the Sony VX are known
as "prosumer" and get used for independently-produced
films quite a bit. Let me know what you decide on. -brain
\_ he's really making a low-budget porn flick and behind the
scenes of so he can more with that flick than he did as SW E
\_ Maybe you can just rent one...perhaps from Adolph Gasser.
\_ Whoops. You're totally right, I didn't even think of that.
If you are making this film in the bay area, check out your
local public access station for very cheap equipment rentals.
For example the Palo Alto station has cameras for $10 / day.
http://mpactv.org is their home page (click on "Producing")
See also the SF Film Arts Foundation at
http://www.filmarts.org/facility/index.html
Also check out their links on that same site -brain
\_ Theres a new HD camera that does 720P/30 that is supposed to
be pretty cool. See link:www.jvc.com -ax
\_ Saw this, but wondered about the low price tag. If it's that
great then why is it cheap (relatively)? I'm skeptical. --dim |
| 2003/7/10-11 [Consumer/Camera] UID:28997 Activity:high |
7/10 Hello,
Beau Bonneau Casting is doing some reshoots for The Matrix 3. We
are currently looking for one photo double. We are looking for a
Caucasian woman in her 20's - 30's very physically fit with dark
hair that has a boys (buzz cut) hairdo. If you know of anyone that
fits this type please have them call 415.777.1114 a.s.a.p. Only
those fitting the type should call. We are only looking for a photo
double. Please do not reply to this email. Thanks.
\_ trinities need not apply.
\_ what if i'm an early 30s slightly brownish white guy with dark
hair i'm willing to cut and im not too fat? thats pretty close
right? do i get the glasses, black outfit and non-makeup makeup?
\_ Score! They called me in and loved me! Next time you wankers
are getting off to CAM's photo it might be me if "she" has
the dark glasses on.
\_ what are photo doubles for?
\_ Mostly for the posters and other 'sexy' shots that go out to
the public. She doesn't have time for that. I'm going to be
unfamous! --white guy in trinity outfit and glasses |
| 2003/7/7-8 [Consumer/Camera] UID:28948 Activity:nil |
7/7 Anyone has a digital SLR camera like the Nikon D-100 or the Canon EOS
10D? Do they have mechanical shutter curtains in front of the CCD just
like their film counterparts do in front of the film? Thanks.
\_EOS D10 Does |
| 2003/5/23 [Consumer/Camera] UID:28537 Activity:very high |
5/23 What's the best/cheapest place for 4x6 photos? Walmart is $.26,
clubphoto is $.25, and snapfish is $.25 (in bulk).
\_ Are you talking about one roll of unprocessed film or individual
reprints?
\_ If you are talking about prints for digital camera, Costco
prints them at $.19 per photo.
\- perfect. |
| 2003/5/15 [Consumer/Camera] UID:28443 Activity:low |
5/14 I'd like to get my mom the most simplistic digital camera possible for
mother's day. My priorities are
1) simplicity
2) an LCD screen so she can see what she just shot
3) some sort of CF-like storage so she can take it on long vacations
4) price (or durability)
5) picture quality
Any recommendations?
\_ I'd look at a lowend Canon or an HP.
\_ Aren't you a few days late? Or really early for 2004?
\_ Just a bad son, which is why it's a camera and not flowers/card.
\_ Canon A200 / A300 (200 is 2 megapixel, 300 is 3 megapixel)
Olympus D390 (2 megapixel). These 3 cameras are pretty easy
to use (especially the Olympus). They don't have zoom, that is
why they are cheap and the photo quality is pretty damn good.
From my experience (for my parents), it's easier for them to
operate a non-zoom camera. If you really want zoom, you can
look at Olympus D380 |
| 2003/5/8-9 [Consumer/Camera] UID:28378 Activity:high |
5/8 I'm about to buy an Olympus C-4000 digital camera. Anyone
wanna talk me out of it?
\_ go to http://www.epinions.com - some criticism on it or the 3000z
\_ I've found http://www.dpreview.com especially the forums, quite
invaluable when it comes to making these decisions.
\_ Thanks! I think I've changed my mind now b/c of this. -op |
| 2003/4/26-28 [Consumer/Camera] UID:28232 Activity:high |
4/25 I'm looking for an inexpensive ($400 or less) digital camera.
Toshiba has some inexpensive ones, and i have been happy with
my toshiba laptop and projector. Though the Sony ones aren't
much more expensive. Any advice?
\_ canon sc230 digital elph. (You can get the s400 for a bit
over 400 online)
\_ have you used this? I've been eyeing this model for a
can get the 4500 for around $350 after rebate. I've had the
950 (which is an older similar model) for a long time and
I've been happy with it. I'm considering upgrading.
I've been happy with it. I'm considering upgrading. Whatever
while now and trying to decide if I should get it. the
cnet reviews seem good... feedback anyone? - !op
\_ Mail me offline. I got mine a week ago and I have
a guarded positive opinion. Tiny, fast, but it
is purely a point and shoot. -jor
\_ aspolito has one as do I. They rule. -ax
\_ yes it's true, I actually agree with ax -aspo
\_ We are one step closer to world peace thanks
to technology. Here's why I bought the S400
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/cameraDetail.php?cam=443
The reviews and sample pics did it for me.
-ax
\_ Nikon Coolpix are nice and they have some rebates now. You
can get the 4500 (4 MP) for around $350 after rebate. I've
had the 950 (which is an older similar model) for a long time
and I've been happy with it. I'm considering upgrading. Whatever
you decide to get, make sure you see it in a store and don't
just buy online without knowing exactly what you're getting.
\_ I recommend Canons and Nikon's (as two above have hinted).
They are generally pretty good. They have lots of experience
with cameras and optics.
\_ I love my Olympus D-550 3 Mpix camera (2.8x optical zoom)
Bought it for $300 @ costco
\_ Canon Powershot A300 is new and great bang/buck ratio
(3MP for $200). |
| 2003/2/9-11 [Consumer/Camera] UID:27354 Activity:moderate |
2/8 I'm looking for a picture of SFMOM, one from the outside that
\_ ob yermom
includes as much of the building as possible. http://sfmoma.org doesn't
seem to have any and I've tried looking elsewhere. Anyone
know where a photo like this might be? Thanks.
\_ http://images.google.com
\_ oops, SFMOMA -op
\_ http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/SFMOMA.html
A side view of the whole exterior and one of the signature tower. |
| 2003/1/29 [Consumer/Camera] UID:27236 Activity:high |
1/29 "Would you like to have this phone? Or would you like to have the
phone holder?"
http://csua.org/u/899 (story.news.yahoo.com)
\_ Hmm. Off by one error. I had to go to the next one to see it.
\_ http://csua.org/u/89a (siemens photo of a tatto'd guy w/ the phone) |
| 2003/1/5 [Consumer/Camera] UID:26994 Activity:low |
1/4 BTW, to the person who wanted a card reader which can read
smartmedia, cardbus, and other formats, all in one reader, such
a thing DOES exist. I saw it in a camera store, of all places. --PM
\_ was it Firewire (as the poster originally requsted)? There are
plenty of USB ones that can read a multitude of flash formats. |
| 2002/12/26-28 [Science/Battery, Consumer/Camera] UID:26919 Activity:kinda low |
12/25 Just got a digital camera that uses AA. The batteries die after 30
minutes (Coolpix 2000). Should I go NiCd, NiMh or LiIon? Or exchange
the Coolpix 2000 for the 2500 (+$60)?
\_ If you like your current camera, go for the NiMH batteries (check
out http://steves-digicams.com for your camera review). The 2500 seems
pretty cool...but with most things, get the best that you can
afford - depending on your level of interest in photography.
\_ Regular batteries have too much internal resistance and so the
camera will see dropping voltage very quickly as it draws
significant amount of current. NiMH will do you good here.
\_ 1850mAh NiMH should do the trick. $13 at Amazon/Circuit City.
\- for AA in flashes i use Varta batteries. might try those. --psb |
| 2002/12/23-25 [Consumer/Camera] UID:26892 Activity:high 50%like:25913 |
12/23 Are there SLR digital cameras?
\_ Not Really. Yes, there are SLRs, but they are not true
"35mm" SLRs. The CCD is not the same size as the film
(24mm X 36mm), as result, the lens you have will not
be the same effective focal length nor apature.
a 50mm f/1.4 will become something like 70mm f/2.3
-- photo geek still waiting
\- there are now 35mm SLR but they are $$$.
and the essence of an "SLR" isn't the
35mm part, who while the caveat is reasonable
"not really" overstates things. in fact there
are even larger format digitals take a look
at bhphoto. --psb
\_ well, for me, the important aspect of
SLRis being able to use dozen lenses
I already have.
\_ then you are limited by the brand
of lenses you currently have.
\_ Yes.
\_ yes. you can add regular lenses to them. They cost at least
$2000 without the lense.
\_ D30s (3mp) are available on ebay for ~1200.
\_ would you trust buying anything from ebay over $1000?
\_ Sure. Know the seller. Most are camera shops with a
virtual presence via Ebay.
\_ I bought a $2K laptop over eBay... no problems.
\_ Olympus makes one for about a G. Not that I would ever buy Olympus.. |
| 2002/11/15-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:26551 Activity:high |
11/15 link:csua.org/u/584 -- a photo I made in Boston. -- misha. \_ yeah and your point is? \_ Um.. what the fuck? the overwhelmingly beligerent tone of the motd getting you a little trigger happy? --scotsman \_ my point: delete the entry if you don't like it. -- misha. \_ Is there some connection between the poster and the reflection? is there some message I'm not getting? -dense about eminem \_ I don't get it. also I think it's funny your .mac javascript photo album thing won't work on internet explorer on the mac i am viewing this on right now. \_ it works for me. but just in case, I mirrored it on http://berloga.com/xxx-eminem.jpg . -- misha. \_ So are you the one with the baby in the boston photos? |
| 2002/11/12 [Consumer/Camera] UID:26519 Activity:high |
11/12 What is the deal with Kim on '24'? --nmpg
Implants .
She's all growns up
It's all a camera trick
\_ URL please?
\_ <DEAD>www.dreamwater.net/elisha/framepics.html<DEAD>
\_ http://us.imdb.com/Name?Cuthbert,%20Elisha
\_ Push-up bra?
\_ Those aren't that big, are they?
\_ compared to when she was 12, yes.
\_ I see.
\_ Exactly. Which shots are you referring to? They actually seem
bigger in her FHM / Maxim shoots than in 24.
\_ She's like a pushed up B cup. Why are you even posting this? |
| 2002/11/5 [Politics/Domestic/911, Consumer/Camera] UID:26411 Activity:very high |
11/4 Anyone has any URLs to the nude pictures of a female star published in
in a magazine Hong Kong a week or so ago that brought the magazine to
closure? Thanks.
\_ do you want the nude pix of the nepalese actress that got her to
kill herself too?
kill herself too? well a lot of people are agitating about this
in nepal. there were also allegagtions she was a ho.
oh this newspaper is on the weeb but it might be hard for
most of you white people to read. i guess you can look at the
pictures. see e.g. http://www.nepalnews.com.np/janastha.htm
--psb
\_ psb, silly boy, look harder:
http://www.nepalnews.com.np/ntimes/issue117/comment.htm
You know, for the white people. --erikred
\- well that isnt where the good stuff is. that's the spin.--psb
\_ yes
\_ Did this actually happen? I can't find much sympathy for
someone who was so ashamed by nudity.
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,5396450%255E401,00.html _/
\_ She was probably condemned by the society. If she felt
ashamed about it, she wouldn't have posted nude.
\_ yeah im sure no one does anything they'd be ashamed of
earlier in life when they're desperate for cash or a break.
get off the motd you spoiled silver spooned elitist pig
child.
\_ uhuh...and you are speaking of personal experience? |
| 2002/10/31-11/1 [Consumer/Camera] UID:26371 Activity:very high |
10/31 Can anyone recommend a reputable camera store to take a good camera
to for cleaning/maintenance? peninsula or south bay is preferable but
I'll take anything in the bay area, really...
\- what kind of camera [brand/model/dollars]. yes, this matters.
you can try horizon in hayward/union city/freemont area.
good but may not be cheep. --psb
\_ It's one of the more expensive Nikon digital cameras from a
couple of years ago, not sure the exact model, maybe D1? (it's
not mine, this is for a friend).
\- if nikon, try horizon. --psb
\_ second that. The full name (at least when I was in Bay Area)
is called "Horizon Electronics" Kind of funny cuz camera
repair is all they do as far as I remembered. It's not cheap,
consider that they have been consistantly doing a good job,
i wouldn't consider them over-charging neither
(my nikon is 19 yr old :) -kngharv
\_ so is my girlfriend! --aaron
\_ i feel pity for u
\_ cheer up, i was kidding |
| 2002/9/30 [Consumer/Camera] UID:26048 Activity:very high |
9/30 special announcement in re: AFGA ULTRA ... it is discontinued.
FUJI has a very saturated negative film but i dunno if they make
one at 50 speed. BTW, do you actually *like* any agfa film? --psb
\_ I've only tried Agfa Portrait 160 and Ultra 50. Portrait 160 turns
out very grainy, even though many people say it's fine grained.
Maybe it has something to do with the lab I used (Kodak). Ultra
gives exaggerated color. Usually I don't use it. But when I go on
a trip and I want some postcard-looking pictures, I'll use it.
\_ also try this:
http://www.outdoorphoto.com/slide.htm#print
\_ Kodak Portra 100T. -- yuen
\_ while we are at it... does any one knows any Tusten-balanced
PRINT film (35mm format)
\_ you can also get filters to help out.
\_ http://www.filmemporium.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/fuji_film.html
\_ Thanks!!!
\_ But those are of motion picture film formats. Can you use
them on a still-picture camera?
\_ you are right. ObGoogle? Key words:
"tungsten balanced film fuji"
(or kodak)
\_ Kodak Portra 100T, Fuji NPL 160. I've never tried them though.
-- yuen
\_ Which Fuji film is it then? Thanks. -- yuen |
| 2002/9/27 [Consumer/Camera] UID:26020 Activity:moderate |
9/26 Any photog here? It looks like B&H doesn't carry Agfa Ultra 50
anymore. Is it discontinued? If so, what's the most color-intense
negative film available nowadays? Thanks.
\_ why when you have digital camera+photoshop?
\_ you mean something like Kodak Portra VC (Vibrant Color)?
\_ No, Ultra was much more intense than that. It was as intense as
slide film. In fact it was so intense that it looked unnatrual.
I'm going on a trip soon so I want to buy some again.
\_ have you searched the photo review sites? I've seen a few
reviews of film out there.
\_ you may find this interesting:
http://www.outdoorphoto.com/slide.htm#print
it mentions Agfa Ultra, so it must be a pretty accurate site,
right? |
| 2002/9/25-26 [Politics/Domestic/California, Consumer/Camera, Computer/Networking] UID:26003 Activity:moderate |
9/25 Okay, going to ask this again since it got nuked while I was rudely
getting my beauty sleep--looking for tips on placement of 802.11b
APs (5 AirPorts in a mid-sized building with ca. 70 clients.) Also,
curious whether it's best to use the same frequency on all APs
or increment it, and whether there's a common method used by clients
to pick an AP if they receive signals from several. ok tnx. -John
\_ It's in the motd archives.
\_ Where are the motd archives?
\_ this question has been asked before... check the archives. |
| 2002/9/23-24 [Consumer/Camera] UID:25979 Activity:very high |
9/23 With all the digital equipments today, what are some of the advantages
of using traditional equipments (e.g. darkroom, enlarger, developing
equipments, etc)? I'm talking about hobbiest equipments, not pros
-ok thx
\_ the snotty art-fags who do photography as "art" will always
make you look like a pro.
prefer analog without bothering to learn about the alternatives.
you could call that an advantage, if you want.
\_ One would be hard pressed to ID the digital (printed on a $150
epson photo printer versus my film prints. For hobby use, it's
in the same ballpark. But consumer digicams still have the
problem with lag, so I use film and a negative scanner too. -jor
\_ Let's wait 2 years and see what your 'photos' look like.
\_ One advantage I can think of is that using traditional equipments
makes you look like a pro.
\_ Only if you know how to use it in which you're a pro, eh?
\_ In terms of the results you can get, there's not a lot of advantage.
Film will provide somewhat higher resolution than mid-range
digitals, but top-end digitals are getting really close, and they
have numerous functional advantages. If you don't already have
a big investment in film, it's probably silly to work much with
it. -tom
\_ In terms of affordable, there's still a big difference. It's
getting closer, but if you don't want to drop a huge load of
cash you get better pictures from film and a good developer.
The main advantage right now with digital is you avoid
developing costs.
\_ digital has enormous advantages, but just in terms of cost,
it's pretty much always gonna be cheaper than film over
time due to the processing issue. -tom
\_ Depends. For personal use I doubt it matters. For my
own use I'd want the best quality and an extra few dimes
a shot is no big deal. At bulk rates, digital is still
a new technology for the big players and not exactly
cheap. --works for film/digital processor
\_ for my personal use it's mattered enormously.
I have taken 5000 shots with my digital camera;
a "few dimes" a shot is greater than the cost of
the camera. If you're doing anything more than
taking occasional family snapshots, digital
will always be cheaper in the long run.
And your photos will probably be better, because
you get better, quicker feedback on what you're
shooting. -tom
\_ 5000 = bulk.
\_ But cheap inkjet prints don't last as long as
traditional prints. You don't want the pictures
you send to your grandma to fade in two years.
Archiveable (sp?) digital prints are more
pictures on paper are more valuable.
expensive. Of course you can send a CD instead
which lasts practically forever and can be
refreshed by copying, but to many people personal
pictures on paper have more sentimental value.
\_ 90% of the shots I take, I don't print at
all. The ones I want to print, I use
ofoto/shutterfly. -tom
\_ shutterfly isn't long for this world. careful
who you trust with your pics. ofoto is kodak
owned so they should be around.
\_ snapfish is also kodak invested. snapfish
can get pretty cheap if you prepay in bulk.
\_ Actually we're owned by District Photo
HQ'd in Maryland. It is my understanding
that no one has lower prices than we do,
but I haven't personally checked. DP is
doing most of the eastern seaboard for
film and all of our digital and film.
They keep up with print technology and
spend considerable effort on keeping
print quality high. --snapfish employee
\_ Beh. New inkjet printers that have
pigment-based inks are on the market now.
\_ gotta love those pigment-based inks!
Furthermore, you can send your digitals to
http://Walmart.com or http://Costco.com and have them printed
on photo paper for cheap.
And you can remove red-eye and gamma-correct
your digitals before having them printed. Oh,
and like tom said, you can throw away the pics
that aren't good before spending a thing on
printing. -emarkp |
| 2002/8/19 [Consumer/Camera] UID:25606 Activity:high |
8/19 Why is 35mm film format called "35mm" and "135"? The film frame
dimension is 24mm x 36mm. Thanks.
\_ It's the size of the magic elves who develop it. |
| 2002/7/12-13 [Consumer/Camera, Recreation/Media] UID:25342 Activity:high |
7/12 The Motd Movie Critic is on the air!
Minority Report: Worth a cheap weekend matinee. Some tongue in cheek
humor to take an edge off the hard stuff. Some hard stuff for those
not into the sillier stuff. A bit scooby dooish on the mystery part
by the middle of the film but no one is expecting Hitchcock. Some have
complained about the advertising overkill in the movie, but the MMC
felt the way the ads were woven into the movie during his escape scenes
added something of value to the film plus a bit of humor. The ads will
also provide some self inflicted angst on those concerned about loss of
privacy. MMC gives Minority Report a B.
\_ it was really good for 1.5 hours, but the ending is really
sappy and almost ruins the whole movie. in fact i'm still mad.
\_ you really are an idiot.
\_ *laugh* I love the quality moderation here. It's almost as
good as slashdot.
\_ Moderation?
MIB2: Definitely *not* better than the first. The plot was sketchy,
the humor was mostly a bad rehash of the worst parts of the first film.
Overall, MMC felt this movie needed a serious rewrite. It looked like
\_ that's probably b/c it _got_ a serious rewrite after 9/11...
a beta or maybe a late alpha version of the first film. It even tried
to poorly follow the same plot as the first. The Smith character was
especially bad due to the way it was written. Smith starts out as a
super agent but by the end is being portrayed as a bumbling idiot and
a newbie know-nothing. It was very odd and felt very wrong. Overall,
MMC was very disappointed with this film. MIB2 gets a C-.
\_ I hear laura flynn boyle gets naked
\_ No one gets nekkid enough to matter. |
| 2002/7/1-2 [Consumer/Camera] UID:25248 Activity:moderate |
6/28 hola, does anyone have a recommendation of a $300-$350 digital camera?
pixel-wise, will any camera in that $ range be adequate for 4x6 prints+
WEEB images ... i.e. pick based on mostly features and interface?
[this is not for me, but an associate]. ok tnx. --psb
\_ What is WEEB?
\_ Canon ELPH S200 for $350. I've been happy with mine. It's simple
to use and the picture quality comes out great.
to use and the picture quality comes out great. It has the most
compact form factor of any 2MP camera out there. I would say,
go to http://imaging-resource.com or http://dpreview.com for info.
\_ for web and 5x7 prints or smaller, you can get away with 1.3mega
pixel camera. I bought one for that purpose for $150.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2001_reviews/d100.html
It all depend upon what you want. If you want a camera
that takes good picture, the one above will do.
Number of Pixels is actually not that important. Quality
of CCD and to small extent, the optics of the camera is
a bit more important.
-- photo geek who has 7 lenses from 20mm to 500mm
in 35mm format and spend more money on film and
developing film than the equipment itself.
\_ Nikon has 7 cameras in that price range, from the Coolpix 2500
to the older 800/950/990 and the newer 775/880/885. Use dealtime
for a good price (and comparison) or simply just cameraworld.
They have good service and great prices.
\_ Of these, I'd recommend the 775 or 885. The 2500 looks like a
toy. |
| 2002/6/16-17 [Consumer/Camera] UID:25111 Activity:high |
6/15 Anyone care to recommend a digital camera? I want a 6x zoom at least.
Optical. At least 1280x1024 resolution. --PeterM
\_ honestly, from what you want, i can tell you that anything
on the market will do. It is *IMPOSSIBLE* to make good 6x zoom
lenses anyway. so, the piece of glasses/plastic at front of your
camera will be the bottleneck on the image quality. For
just average image quality (which is what you want, and there is
nothing wrong with that), just get the cheapest 2 megapixel
camera you can find on the market... unless, you are a gadget
geek and want the woo and ahhs from your friends.
A word of advice: 2x zoom is good for normal uses, and the shorter
end is more important than the longer end.
-- kngharv
\_ 1280x1024 < 1.5megapixel, so you can go low end...
\_ I have a Cannon S330 and like it a lot. It only has a 3x optical
zoom, but it may be sufficient if you only need 1280x1024 --twohey
\_ My S330 is a 2 MegaPigal camera.
\_ Definitely look at the Fuji 4900/6900 and the replacement for those,
S2 or something. If you want 6x or greater in a decent camera
that doesn't cost $1000+, you're looking at Fuji or Olympus. -tom
\_ Peter--I have a Digital Ixus 300. It's not the newest or the
best, but it's still the nicest camera I've ever had. The colors
are great, and although it's just 2.1MP and 3x optical zoom,
I can only recommend it. http://www.dpreview.com had some
great objective criteria when I was trying to decide. Also,
keep in mind that I will buy a regular 35mm film camera if I ever
want really high quality images. -John
\_ If you can wait, wait until the true "digital SLR" comes out.
Right now, the SLR is not quit there yet because they can't
make the size of the sensor equal to those of 35mm. That
will be at least 3+ years from now.
\_ why do you care about the size of the sensor? It has
virtually nothing to do with image quality, unless you're
using a recording medium with low resolution (like film).
\_ by the time you do that, digital will be higher-quality than
35mm. It already is in many cases. -tom
\_ depend upon what do you mean by higher-quality. If you are
talking about images on computer screen, perhaps. If you
are talking about large prints, then, digital still got a
long way to go compare with Leica or Contax. Then again,
most people who is serious about photography tend to
use medium format anyway.
\_ top-quality digital cameras already compete with 35mm for
print quality. Even my camera, which is two generations
old, produces better 8x10 prints than cheap film cameras.
-tom |
| 2002/6/10-11 [Consumer/Camera] UID:25060 Activity:high |
6/10 I have a client who is interested in photography. For years he
has used film, and is now interested in moving his archive of
images into digital form. He is an amateur bordering on
professional, and he is interested in improving. His archive
contains several thousand images which he is willing to
scan, manipulate via PhotoShop, categorize, and store. The
problem is indexing such a store-- he would like the primary index
to be by location (where/when the photo was taken) but secondary
indexes on (for example) subject, source, modificationHistory,
etc. Short of creating a relational DB schema and writing a gui
for it myself, what are his options? His computer skills are
limited, but he's willing to pay for something that works well and
won't destroy the image data. He is also interested in
specialized hardware for automatically scanning 35mm film
negatives. Any recommendations/links appreciated. -- mjm
\_ try thumbsplus from cerious software (http://www.cerious.com It
does this sort of organization and management fairly well. -mice
\_ stock agencies use a few db products for cataloging, some
limited shareware stuff is out there. There is not good stuff
for batch scanning of negatives though - I find it often doesn't
stay aligned within each frame. It will take a while.
\_ I'm also interested in this. Any suggestions? -!mjm
\_ I'm also interested in this. Let me know what you end up doing.
\- the Nikon coolscan8000 will do 5 at a time. you can get a
batch load that will do a bunch at a time but it is noncheap
batch loader that will do a bunch at a time but it is noncheap
and yes there may be some minor alignment issues if you are
really picky but you can scan oversize range and crop later,
that transmit a lot of light, in my experience. --psb
although this causes some edge problems on certain slides
that transmit a lot of light, in my experience. a company i
have some affilation with is working on some software
to glue together various image management softwares in the
while camera -> webpage pipeline. i may be looking for
alpha/beta testers at some point. --psb
\_ Is the 8000 much better than the much cheaper 4000?
\- look at the stats and see what you want/need. |
| 2002/4/6 [Consumer/Camera] UID:24347 Activity:very high |
4/5 Why is that the text overlay feature (i.e., date/timestamp) only
exists in higher end digital cameras? Is it that expensive of
a feature to put in? I want just a basic digital camera that
does what my regular camera does. Timestamp, auto-flash, etc...
The digital camera that have text overlay usually have movie
mode too which I don't care about. Any suggestions?
\_ if you get prints from somewhere like Shutterfly, they'll print
the EXIF info on the back of the print--that might be sufficient
for your needs. -tom
\_ It does actually, thanks!
\_ Don't get too used to using Shutterfly. They're not long for
this world. They're headed directly to the FC Hall of Fame.
\_ What about others? Ofoto (owned by Kodak), Snapfish,
etc? Do they print the EXIF info? |
| 2002/4/3-4 [Consumer/Camera, Recreation/Humor, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:24297 Activity:moderate |
4/2 is there any http://adcritic.com-like site around these days? \_ It's coming back soon; it got some sponsor \_ ifilm is kind of like it, not as good, but some of the same stuff \_ If you're looking for funny shorts, check out http://www.thelonelyisland.com I find it hilarious... but maybe just because this guy is a friend of mine. - rory \_ NYC jewish rappers (Beastie Boys) >> LA jewish rappers. \_ I think the key difference is that Beastie Boys are for real and these guys are basically a joke \_ I think the real difference is between othodox and reform jews. |
| 2002/2/15-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:23875 Activity:kinda low |
2/15 What's a good digital camera for less than $450??
\_ http://dpreview.com, http://dcresource.com.
\_ Canon PowerShot S110 or S300. |
| 2002/1/4 [Consumer/Camera] UID:23447 Activity:high |
1/3 http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/EART/campus/ucb-4-4.jpg AWSOME! \_ Yes. A jpg of northside from a viewpoint of a few hundred feet up but probably from a satellite. And? \_ Bzzt. Aerial photography of Northside shot in 1994. Here's The Rest of the Story: http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/EART/campus \_ Uhm yeah ok a photo from a plane and this is "AWSOME!" because...? You can't even see any nekkid chicks on the co-oop roofs. \_ the co-op i lived in had no neked chix on the roof, just poop mabye there were naked chix there before the poop. \_ how about naked chicks pooping? \_ http://www.arch.ced.berkeley.edu/kap/gallery/gallery.html \_ Wow. Is this why I can't fly a kite near March Air Force Base? |
| 2001/12/19-20 [Consumer/Camera] UID:23307 Activity:insanely high |
12/19 Looking for recommendations on digital cameras. Budget ~$5000.
I like SLR's, and anything that would fit on the back of my Cannon
AE-1 would be fine. Preferably it could take a microdrive. -chialea
\_ spending $5000 on a camera is akind to giving weight-control
pet food to your pets. This country is just absurdly rich.
want to just buy a digital film back? I've never heard of those
for 35mm SLRs.
That's probably the lifetime salary of a peasant in East Timor.
\_ You can't get a half-decent digital SLR for much cheaper...
\_ You can't get a half-decent digital SLR for <$3000.
\_ Shut up. <DEAD>www.photo.net/photo/digital/choosing#between<DEAD>
\_ Yes and the east timor peasant provides how much back to the
world in skills and work effort? This country is absurdly
rich because we built a better country with a better government
with real laws and a real economy. This is something most of
the rest of the world's corrupt governments refuse to do. Once
shitty third world pits separate church and state, and put in
real laws and enforce them so things like contract law have
value and meaning, they can have a real economy and you can stop
whining about some peasants because that peasant will be out
producing your hippie ass.
\_ Rich kid!
\_ Graduation present.
\_ Point proven.
\_ What point? Yes. It's true. Some people have more money
than others. What's your point?
\_ What do you mean by "fit on the back of my Canon AE-1"? Do you
want to just buy a digital film back instead of a whole camera?
I've never heard of those for 35mm SLRs. -- yuen
\_ I hadn't either, but if that was the best option, and it did
exist, didn't want to rule it out.
\_ If you already have a decent SLR, look at SiliconFilm.
http://www.imagek.com
Supports certain Nikon's and Canon's. Don't know how well it works,
but it kicks ass in theory. Try Greenspun's
<DEAD>www.photo.net<DEAD> for camera reviews.
\_ $649 for 1280x1024 resolution? At that price, it definitely
falls into the "cool in theory" category. For the same money,
I'd either purchase a digital point-and-shoot to go alonside
the old AE-1, and/or a film scanner . . . -- kahogan
\_ (This got deleted earlier)
The digital backs for 35mm film cameras are worthless.
The Canon D30 is probably the most well-respected digital
SLR. But you should go to one of the dozens of review
sites, like http://dpreview.com. -tom
\_ http://www.usa.canon.com/EOS-1D is an obvious choice if
you want to use Canon lenses. Note that focusing distance
increases by 1.3x, so 38mm becomes the normal lens (because
the chip is smaller than 35mm film). Or, for just $19k more,
get http://www.foveon.net/prod_new_specs.html -- misha.
\_ You meant the perceived focal length increases.
\_ I stand duly corrected. -- misha.
\_ "Power supplied through IEEE1394 cable - no separate power
cable" Is this puppy tethered? |
| 2001/11/15-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:23056 Activity:nil |
11/15 Is there any camera rental place similar to Adolph Gasser but is in
East Bay, preferably near Fremont? Thanks. |
| 2001/11/6-7 [Consumer/Camera, Recreation/Media] UID:22945 Activity:nil |
5/11 Anybody want to post a link to the Phantom Edit? Seems interesting. http://salon.com/ent/movies/feature/2001/11/05/phantom_edit/index.html \_ gnutella |
| 2001/11/5 [Consumer/Camera] UID:22933 Activity:low |
10/4 Since Digital8 camcorders use 8mm tapes, can they also play analog
8mm tapes? In another word are the players backward compatible?
\_ Most, if not all are backward compatible with 8mm tapes, that
was the selling point when they first came out. Double-check
with the unit manuf though. |
| 2001/10/19 [Consumer/Camera] UID:22772 Activity:nil |
10/19 Which is the best ultra-compact digital camera?
\_ http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=67909965&m=5760930492
\_ Thank you! |
| 2001/9/15-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:22472 Activity:high |
9/15 where can I find a copy of that photo of the firefighters raising the
flag, similar to the famous Iwo Jima photo?
\_ http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/rescue2/6.html --jon
\_ thanks!
\- does anyone know where there is a copy of the picture of the
businessman in a fedora-type hat from the back looking up at
the inferno? that is one of the best pix i have seen from
the situation. --psb |
| 2001/9/15-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:22449 Activity:low |
9/14 I don't really understand the idea behind making posters and
pictures to carry around in the search for your loved ones.
Not to minimize their loss, but are people merely playing to the
camera? I don't recall seeing this mourning in this fashion
before.
\_ There is both the "have you seen this child" pictures on milk
box cartons, as well as "the disappeared ones" whose relatives
would carry around pictures of their missing loved ones as
a form of protest. This is not quite the same thing, but
there is a tradition of similar things. -ausman
\_ Hmmmm, maybe because they want to FIND their loved ones? |
| 2001/8/30-31 [Consumer/Camera] UID:22295 Activity:nil |
8/30 I'm interested in buying a camcorder. Does anyone have any
recommendations for a model/brand at a nice price-performance point?
Thanks!
\_ I did some shopping for analog ones for my aunt two years ago. The
Sony CCD-TRV series seemed pretty good back then. I ended up with
a CCD-TRV46. -- yuen |
| 2001/7/5-6 [Consumer/Camera] UID:21719 Activity:high |
7/5 An olympus stylus camera accidently went overboard during
river rafting yesterday. Water was too cold/deep for normal
recovery with the gear we had, so the camera has been
submerged a day already. It's supposed to be "weatherproof";
I was wondering if it's worth going back with scuba gear
to recover the film (don't care about the camera, but the film
has pictures from a previous trip) - does anyone know what the
effect of water on exposed film is? Thanks... - mds
\_ you dumbass...why would you take that camera on a rafting
trip in the first place? Just because it's weatherproof
doesn't mean it's submergable. Besides that, the
activity of rafting should tell you you need to bring
a water camera and to hold on tight....
\- i would only bother in the "here's a crazy thing to try" scenario
rather than the "i want by camera and film back" motivation. --psb
rather than the "i want by camera and film back" motivation. btw,
i have fallen into a river with a camera before and the pix were
sort of washed out but developable. --psb |
| 2001/4/30-5/1 [Consumer/Camera] UID:21151 Activity:high |
4/30 Can somebody id this short film? It's an animated short film shown on
PBS a few years ago. The story is about an old man in France who
transformed an entire mountain by planting cherry blossoms. I think
it was cherry blossoms, might be another tree that has pink flowers.
After he dies the mountain is named after him. Thanks.
\_ http://ifilm.com might help you out.
\_ That sounds like "The man who planted trees"
("L' Homme qui plantait des arbres"), though
I saw it a long time ago at the Honolulu
Academy of the Arts and don't remember if
there were cherry blossoms involved. -ok
the trees involved had pink flowers. -ok
\_ THANK YOU! :-) |
| 2001/4/29-5/1 [Consumer/Camera] UID:21139 Activity:high |
4/29 Any APS film scanners in/around berkeley that I can borrow/pay-to-use?
-- sagarwal
\_ Yes.
\_ Oh, thats helpful. Where?
\_ If you'd sign you post maybe I could be even more helpful.
\_ ok.
\_ No. |
| 2001/4/24-25 [Consumer/Camera, Politics/Foreign/Asia/China, Uncategorized/Profanity] UID:21080 Activity:high |
4/389 <DEAD>www.psychoexgirlfriend.com/voicemails.html<DEAD> \_ yes, thank you. also, a chinese jet collided with an american reconnaissance craft, film at 11. \_ no shit! really? when did that happen? |
| 2001/4/20 [Consumer/Camera, Recreation/Dating] UID:21026 Activity:moderate |
4/19 Anyone's seen Memento? How was it?
\_ I don't remember.
\_ awesome. It was a cross between Usual Suspects, Pulp Fiction,
Betrayal, and film noir. Pay attention, don't go get popcorn.
\_ It was very creative story. But I don't think it was an awesome
film.
\_ _Soldier of the Mist_, _Soldier of Arete_, Gene Wolfe
\_ goetz?
\_ Well, it's good enough where I'd consider it criminal if this
worthy film does not get a nationwide release. The film
had more plot twists than a double helix.
\_ If it's not that good why do 5 http://imdb.com staff give it
an average rating of 9?
\_ it's barely released and has already cracked the top #50
on http://IMDB.com.
\_ damn it people.. don't give away the movie. This is one of
those chicks where the less you know the better experience
you'll have.
\_ I'm trying to convince my friend and his wife to see this tomorrow
night, but my friend says he's heard it's violent, and he wouldn't
want to mislead his spouse. Is it that violent?
overall cuz she doesn't like movies with violence.
\_ A dude gets his head blown off in the first two mins.
\_ My gf have it props for creativity but gave it thumbs down
overall cuz she doesn't like movies with that much violence.
\_ What's with their commercials? Are they European or something? |
| 2001/3/22 [Consumer/Camera, Reference/Military] UID:20881 Activity:nil |
3/21 http://rense.com/general8/boom.htm |
| 2001/2/15-18 [Consumer/Camera, Health/Men] UID:20608 Activity:very high |
2/15 Anyone have any suggestions for a good morphing program? I want to
morph some faces from a digital camera into Marilyn Monroe.
\_ Stills or video?
\_ stills. I'd want it in steps, like @5%, or 1%. 10% is acceptable,
too, but better resolution is preferred.
\_ OS? xmorph isn't great, and it's kinda a pain to use, but the
results look passable.
\_ It would be for Win9x. Thanks.
\_ Free? Probably not.. probably want something like
KPT.
\_ Microsoft's DirectX SDK comes with a demo program that
does this.
\_ matlab. -ali
\_ Matlab is for wimps. Real men program their vector and matrix
libraries in C or Fortran.
\_ Real men are dumb enough not to use LAPACK?
\_ you can try these, although I have no experience with any of them:
BitMorph: http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/dmc27/bitmorph.html
Morpheus: http://www2.gvsu.edu/~rubleyr/morpheus
WinMorph: http://www.crosswinds.net/~sskr/winmorph |
| 2001/1/15-16 [Consumer/Camera, Computer/SW/Apps] UID:20331 Activity:nil 58%like:20323 |
01/15 Can someone recommend a reference/introduction to photo negative
retouching? (_not_ digital, ie !photoshop) |
| 2000/12/21-25 [Consumer/Camera] UID:20151 Activity:moderate |
12/20 What's the resolution of a consumer camcorder? When I hook up my
camcorder to my 20" TV the image doesn't look as sharp as those from
broadcasting stations.
\_ Your consumer camcorder uses VHS, they broadcast SuperVHS.
There is a noticeable difference.
\_ Broadcasters only use SVHS? I thought it was something better..
\_ believe it or not, many of them actually use Betamax.
\_ I believe that broadcasters use Betacam, which is a more
professional-grade version of Betamax.
\_ This depends alot on the camcorder. If it's normal 8, yes it's
going to be a lot lower resolution. If it's Hi-8/S-VHS/it will
be "broadcast quality" but a lot depends on the quality of the
camera itself. I've known normal 8 cameras to "look" better on
first gen than hi-8/s-vhs because of better color. Some brands
really suck. Some of the new digital cameras beat Betacam,
but ya gotta spend $3K -- but that sure beats $15K!
but ya gotta spend $3K -- but that sure beats $15K! Also,
you might be inadvertently recording in "EP" or "SLP" mode
which will definitely affect quality. Finally, be sure to
have a hi-8 tape or S-VHS tape if that's what your camera uses,
if you use normal 8 or VHS you are going to see the difference.
\_ That's great people, but if you read the question,
you'd realize the question is asking for resolution.
-troll |
| 2000/10/28-31 [Consumer/Camera, Academia/Berkeley] UID:19591 Activity:low |
10/28 What is a good place in Berkeley to get film developed & get a PhotoCD?
The ASUC place has lost a couple of my rolls before, so they suck.
\_ Custom Process near the 4th street yuppie area.
Otherwise, I think you're stuck with Kodak, who has lost
negatives for me. -sony
\_ <DEAD>www.walmart.com...drop<DEAD> off your photos and you get the back
with photoCD and they get scanned online as well.
\_ Sarber's on Solano -- or http://ofoto.com
\_ make sure u want photoCD, not pictureCD... photoCD is hella
more expensive, and if you don't need the resolution and
dynamic range, it may not worth the price.
http://www.photo.net/neighbor -kngharv |
| 2000/9/11-12 [Consumer/Camera] UID:19223 Activity:high |
9/10 Has anyone ever bought a large quality of semi-exotic film from
an online place? any online places with good prices on film?
i am looking for something like 20-40 rolls of velvia. ok tnx --psb
\_ S&M (http://www.bhphotovideo.com has velvia 36 for $4.99 a
\_ S&M (http://www.bhphotovideo.com has vulva 36 for $4.99 a
roll-in-the-hay, $99.80 for a pro-packing of 20". I haven't
found it for cheaper.
\_ But those are grey market prices. The USA ones cost $5.39 and
$107.80. Are the grey Velvia rolls from B&H in good condition?
-- yuen
\-what does "grey mkt" mean in the film world? --psb
\_ B&H's definition is that the good is imported and
warrantied by the store, not by an authorized dealer.
warrantied by the store, not by an authorized dealer. So
the manufacturer does not guarantee the condition of the
good because it has no control over what happened to
the good during transportation (heat/shock/...).
\_ just like http://Priceline.com |
| 2000/8/14-15 [Consumer/Camera] UID:18986 Activity:moderate |
8/14 I want to get an APS Film Scanner. BestBuy in Pinole & Frys in Fremont
don't have them. Anyone have any suggestions? Don't want to order
off the web.
\_ A store as big as Fry's don't have them? Anyway, try MicroCenter
\_ Fry's carries the Canoscan 2710, which is 35mm and APS, and is
decently reviewed in the cheap (500$) category).
\_ A store as big as Fry's doesn't have them? Anyway, try MicroCenter
in Santa Clara. |
| 2000/8/10-11 [Consumer/Camera] UID:18954 Activity:high |
8/10 How does APS film compare with regular film? (quality and things
like that)
\_ Same emulsion. Smaller negative for same size print. You do math.
\_ http://www.photo.net/photo/aps
\_ APS is good for ordinary things like vacations photos, but not
for professional stuff. I like my APS camera, but I take ~ 4
photos a year.
\_ More expensive to buy & develop film, lots of kewl features
such as wide-angle shots, I think the negative strips don't
work with most (any?) photo negative scanners if that's what
you want to do. -John
\_ APS wide-angle shots are not real panorama shots. All the
camera does is to cover up the top and bottom portions of the
negative. You can achieve the same effect by taking a picture
with the APS "normal" format or a 35mm format, and then grab
a pair of scissors and cut away the top and bottom portions of
the print. About scanners, I have a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual
which lets me buy an APS adapter for ~$115 if I want. I think
some scannes have built-in APS capabilities. (BTW the driver
that comes with the Scan Dual sucks big time. I switched to a
3rd party driver and I got *much* better image quality.) -- yuen
\- APS was a sleazy money grab by Kodak. If you arent a serious
photographer and dont have a large investment in hardware, get
a digital camera. --psb |
| 2000/8/7-8 [Consumer/Camera] UID:18915 Activity:nil |
8/7 Where is a cheap place to get APS film developed and get a
PhotoCD too? Does costco do photocds? [motd formatting God was here]
\_ Just a sidenote: make sure you do get PhotoCD and not PictureCD,
which some places only offer. My $250 Epson scanner produces
better quality images than PictureCD (I've done side-by-side
comparisons)
\_ PhotoCD is nearly gone. Picture CD will get you 1500x800 rez
images for APS. Quality is decent, you'd mostly want it as a
time saver over scanning yourself.
\_ ugh, biology can't answer this one
\_ biology -- keeping memories of the past on cd as the mind will
deteriorate faster over time. Using a tool to aid the body. |
| 2000/7/10 [Consumer/Camera, Recreation/Media] UID:18626 Activity:insanely high |
7.9 http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/newsid_825000/825641.stm aye. Deckard == Replicant. \_ Bruce Willis == ALready dead (6th sense) note the //ism \_ Everyone knows this already. \_ AH! But did you know that Deckard was a failed homosexual? http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/newsid_825736/879641.stm \_ If you didn't already figure this out after watching the Director's Cut, you're a moron. -mogul \_ note: it didn't work for me until i loaded the directory and then clicked on the bladerunner link. stoopid web server --oj \_ my officemate called my reaction to this article "very pomo" which apparently means "post mosternist". i know i should hit him, for using the term, but is this considered and insult or a compliment? -ali \_ so what was your reaction? \_ yes, it is. i think it depends if he's a "pomo" himself. --oj \_ what is a "mosternist"? \_ Only losers have ever used the term "pomo" and to be using it in the 21st century means BIG-loser. Therefore, you \_ not as "BIG-loser" as not knowing what a "century" is shouldnt feel insulted or complimented by him. If you do, then you're the loser. Hit yourself. \_ soda motd cum slashdot gateway! thanks! |
| 2000/6/14-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:18468 Activity:nil |
6/14 Has anyone developed film onto KodakCD? How is the quality?
\_ When you say "KodakCD", do you mean PhotoCD (their "pro" product),
or PictureCD (their cheaper "home" product)? With PhotoCD, you get
back your images scanned at 5 different resolutions, the highest of
which is 2000x3000. With PictureCD, you get a single 1024x1536 scan
of each image. I've never used PhotoCD, but I've gotten a PictureCD
with each roll of film I've developed while in Europe so that I
have an easy way of sharing vacation pics on the Web. It works well
for that -- decent resolution, decent contrast/color balance, no
problems with added dust and scratches. I usually only have to do a
crop and some minimal brightness/contrast twiddling for each image
I want to share. Search for both product names on http://photo.net to read
about the respective experiences of others. -- kahogan |
| 2000/5/12 [Consumer/Camera] UID:18246 Activity:high |
5/11 This question has been asked several times before... what's a good
SLR to buy for $500? Any pointers to websites?
\-assuming you dont have a large investment in lenses and are
talking 35mm format I think an N90 is pretty good investment if
you think you might end up becoming a reasonably serious photographer.
The price of those should have gone down after the F100 was introduced.
If you get something like that, you can continue to use the lenses on
more advanced nikon ... and the N90 is a plenty advanced camera. Main
draw backs are 1. nikon supplementary gear is expensive 2. highly
electronic cameras dont do so well in the cold. --psb
\_ The body was $729 on CameraWorld. I was looking at the Canon
A2 or Elan II kit and Nikon N70 kit and possible alternatives. Any
pros/cons? Also, any comments on http://siliconfilm.com?
\_ http://photo.net
\-the N90 isthe cheapest of the serious Nikons. Of course
there is a ratcheting aspect to that. If I was buying a body
now I would have paid the exra $500 to get the F100. However
when I was buying my camera, it was a choice between $1K N90
and $2.5K F5 ... so it wasnt a real choice. I would take a
used N90 over a new N70. If you are willing to write an
intelligent post [here are my priorities and constraints and
the options i am considering], you will get a good answer on
the photo hardware newsgroup. --psb |
| 2000/4/17-18 [Consumer/Camera] UID:18033 Activity:low |
4/17 Are there a price comparison sites for camera and accessories more
complicated than point and shoot?
\_ Yup. |
| 2000/4/13-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:18001 Activity:nil |
4/12 Is it a good idea to purchase a factory refurbished camera?
I am thinking of a Nikon Pronea 6i. It seems only refurbished
\_ pr0n?
model still exists with reasonable price. ($200).
\_ wow. they really make a camera just for shooting porn. |
| 2000/4/13-16 [Consumer/Camera] UID:18000 Activity:high |
4/12 What's people's comments and opinions about APS camera? Is this
format going to stay and how does it compare with 35mm? I am
considering buying an APS SLR camera vs. an SLR with auto. focus.
(like a N70 vs. a Pronea 6i) Any informative URL is also
apreciated.
\_ philg has an opinionated review of APS here:
http://photo.net/photo/aps.html
\_ I don't have either of the ones you mentioned, but I do have
a Fuji APS camera with auto focus and zoom. I got it at Target
for less than $100. My father (a photography enthuisast, owns
several Roli-flex cameras) tells me that it is not as good as
35mm, but I can't tell the difference. Also its a lot simpler
to use. I just pop in the cartridge and turn it on. And if
you get one of the newer models, you can switch between
partially exposed rolls of film.
\_ If loading 35mm film is still 'hard' after the first few
rolls, you're probably someone who still uses Velcro shoes,
'cause you never could get the hang of that tying-thing . . .
\_ No I wear sandals. No laces, no velcros, no socks.
I prefer to keep things simple and straight-forward.
Loading was a big reason I disliked cameras, but with
the APS, I actually have finished a roll of film. It
took two years, but I still finished all 24 shots.
\_ I use APS for my UW photography. For recreational use, it is
probably fine, though many find the Panoramic setting to result
in grainy images. It definitely has limitations, and it's
slightly more expensive to shoot/develope, is much harder to
get decent 1hr service for, and outside of the USA is virtually
unseen (a big problem for me). -jor, http://www.jor.com/dive/aquashot
\_ "outside of the USA" is a big place: if you're talking about
the third world, sure, but here in Germany the section for
APS cameras and film is almost as large as the 35mm section
in most stores. In other places in Europe where I've had the
occasion to notice (Belgium, Spain, the UK), the situation
seemed similar. -- kahogan
\_ Even when I was in China, I was able to buy APS film. I
didn't try to get it developed there, though.
\_ My mom took my APS camera to India and she had no
problems getting it developed. They took 3 days though,
and she was in Banglore. Its pretty much the same in
most large cities (Madras, Bombay, Calcutta, Delhi) in
India. ----ranga
\_ You are of course correct. There is no APS presence in the
Caribbean where I go to dive. No results till I return. -jor
\_ isn't the problem with APS is it is both a pain in the butt and
expensive to get the film developed?
\_ APS is much simpler to use than 35mm. The development takes
about a day and the cost is 1 to 2 dollars more. IMHO, the
extra few bucks and time is worth it for the simplicity.
AFAIK, APS isn't targeted at the professional market, its
targeted at the oridinary fool market, where simplicity
is a big selling point.
\_ uh, simplicity is a function of the camera, not the film
type. how is a point-and-shoot APS camera simpler than
a point-and-shoot 35mm camera? APS will die for the same
reason the Disc did; the quality sucks and it's not really
any easier to use. -tom
\_ Film loading. Loading a 35mm film camera is
much harder than an APS camera. You need to
position the film just right, etc. Also, say
you have two different speed film, one for
outdoors and one for indoors. Try switching
between them while both are partially exposed.
Not possible in most 35mm cameras. In APS
no problem.
no problem. Also APS means no raw negatives
to deal with. You just save the film canister
and when you want to develop a partiuclar
you just look at the handy index print and
give the developer the number of the picture.
I disagree about the quality. It is almost as
good as 35mm that most people can't tell the
difference. I would pick simplicity over
marginally better quality most of the time.
\_ wow, you really are incompetent aren't you?
\_ so you have a Disc? -tom
(the quality of APS is more than marginally worse).
\_ If you buy an APS camera, get one of those cute super-petite
models, 'cause chicks dig 'em.
\_ I don't know if you are joking, but I have had random
chicks approach me when I was taking pictures with
my ELPH camera.
\_ It's much easier to find 35mm SLR with inerchangable lens than
APS SLR, but since you're getting Nikon, this is not a problem for
adapter. Scans from APS film are natually more grainly than those
you. (BTW, I have N70 and FM2.) I think APS film scanner costs
more than 35mm ones too. Mine (Minolta Dimage Scan Dual) costed
~$350 and scans 35mm, but it won't scan APS unless I buy a ~$100
adapter. Scans from APS film are natually more grainy than those
from the same type of 35mm film simply because the film area is
smaller. -- yuen
\- IMHO: if youa re serious about photography, get the SLR.
If you are not serious, get a digital in your price range.
Unless you are really into those panoramic shots I dont see
any reason to get an APS these days. --psb |
| 2000/1/10-11 [Consumer/Camera] UID:17203 Activity:very high |
1/10 Recommendations for a good place to get a camera within the 2-digit
price range? (don't bother with "cheapskate" comments)
\_ How about a spelling comment?
\_ Target. I bought a Fuji APS camera there for about $80
(two digits) and it works great. It even has zoom.
\_ The minolta Stylus is good, near 100, weatherproof. APS can
result in smaller camera size, but film costs are higher and
the quality is slightly inferior. -jor
\_ But chicks dig 'em! I've never had more "oooh, that's so
*CUTE*!" comments on a camera than when I borrowed an (APS)
Canon ELPH for a few days. I'm sure the ELPH costs more
than double-digit, though.
\- er, in the two digit range, what is the most $ you can save,
about $10? the real question is what model to get not where to
get it. just pick some net.store once you pick the model --psb
\_ They say the same about your penis when they see it the
first time?
\_ http://www.bhphotovideo.com or http://www.cameraworld.com If you don't like
mail-ordering, Costco has good prices too if you have membershipp
and don't mind chhoosing from only a few models. |
| 1999/12/28-30 [Consumer/Camera] UID:17110 Activity:high |
12/28 Should I get a camcorder for 8mm or VHS-C? VHS-C is attractive
because I can just pop my tape into a VHS player.
\_ Get 8mm -- higher quality, and if you want VCR hookup, there's
always good ole A/V coax cable
\_ Get one that also supports Hi8.
\_ Use linux. Ride bike.
\_ U53 W1ND0///5!!! W1ND0///5 R3WLZ!!! L1NUX 5UX!!
\_ DV Camera! |
| 1999/11/10-12 [Consumer/Camera] UID:16862 Activity:high |
11/10 http://www.m-w.com/book/elecprod/vocabbdr.htm \_ proof that Amazon (book monopoly) is bad for consumers \_ Why? Because you can buy from them OR B&N? \_ Amazon does not have a book monopoly. And although M$ is a bad monopoly, not all monopolies are bad. \-what is an example of a non-bad monopoly? \_ I think utilities are the canonical example. W/ competition the public loses returns to scale. But it does need more regulatin' \-well PU are an exercise in regulation \_ What? You're selling your SO's sexual activity? \_ you thought she was privately held, but in reality, publicly traded \_ I was there at the IPO but sold out soon after. She released more shares to the public which dramatically diluted her value. \_ did you get in as friends & family at a substantially lower price? \_ I had the Preferred Customer price. and thats where the problems come from. so this is a bad example of a non-bad monopoly. if you are interested in an interesting study on this look at Train: Optimal Regulation [Train = UCB Econ]. There may be some interesting cases where a monopoly is a property right that ought to be granted to someone and is an efficent solution to a problem. This can either be an auction distributed right to fish/airwaves etc or something like an alternative to a side-payment system ... say instead of moving african natives from some place you want to become a wildlife preserve or paying them off, give them a monopoly on say camera film sales. --psb \_ a monopoly over your SO's sexual activity? \-i dont think pimps having exclusive rights is particularly good for the hos. i suspect it isnt good for the public either. --psb \_ silly, twisted sodans, I speak of a gf's/bf's monogamy. SO != prostitute. (I hope.) \_why is that URL proof that amazon is a book monopoly? |
| 1999/10/29-11/2 [Consumer/Camera] UID:16794 Activity:low |
10/29 If you have a moment and a 24bit display, please look at
http://www.jor.com/contest and help me pick 2 entries to mail off tonight
for an UW photo contest. thanks - jor
\_ What exactly is the theme of the contest though? Simply
"underwater photography"? --- yuen
\_ if anything, prove that a cheap UW camera can deliver.
grand prize is a week of diving in the caymans for 2.
http://www.ikelite.com/apc_finalists/apcf_pages/apcf_idx1.html
has last year's finalists.
\_ In that case, jor's rig-metridiums.jpg would be my first
choice. For the second choice, I can't decide between
anemonie.jpg and R-FISH.jpg. --- yuen
\_ I'll agree with the current picks; esp. the anemone. |
| 1999/10/5-8 [Consumer/Camera] UID:16668 Activity:low |
10/5 Does anyone have experience shopping for cameras at
http://www.photographicphoto.com
\_ Do yourself a favor and go to http://www.bhphotovideo.com
They are rude, but cheap, efficient and honest.
\_ Imagine a world where honesty, value an efficiency in a
retail sales industry was parallelled by politeness and
respect for the customer... oh, wait... I must be asking for
too much. God forbid should anyone be polite. -(fucker)
\_ I saw the price on http://www.photographicphoto.com is considerably
lower but if you have or have heard of bad experience with
it please post it. Thanks.
\_ Try Adorama or Smile Photo. B&H is known to have
good stuff, but higher prices. Never heard of this
photographicphoto place, but their prices don't seem that
low to me.
\_ I've always had good experience with mail-ordering at B&H
and CWO (http://www.cameraworld.com I think they are not rude,
but they are not the cheapest either. If you're buying
popular items, CWO usually has lower prices than B&H.
Otherwise it's the other way around. Haven't tried any
mail-order stores other than these two because I heard
most others like to cheat. -- yuen
\_ I am the one who said B&H are rude but honest...
I STRONGLY recommend you look at this informal survey:
http://photo.net//neighbor/one-subcategory.tcl?id=2
good luck -serious snapshooter
\_ Another survey can be found at
http://www.cmpsolv.com/los/pmos.shtml
This one lists the number of satisfied/dissatisfied customers
at each mail-order store. -- yuen |
| 1999/9/15 [Consumer/Camera] UID:16525 Activity:nil |
9/15 Hey has anyone heard of a BW film dev process called NP22?
I have some film i bought in another country that says ISO 125/22o
and am trying to find out if it cane be developed here. --psb
\_ "another country" == india?
\_ Try calling Looking Glass on Telegraph. They probably know where
you can send the film to. --- yuen |
| 1999/9/10-13 [Consumer/Camera] UID:16500 Activity:very high |
9/10 Is 800 speeds film really "best" for several different conditions
while the lower speed ones are each good only for some? Where can
I learn more about this?
\_ Take a class at any local adult school/community center. A basic
photography class can be invaluable.
\_ As the above says, it's just windows. win98 won't be that much
better. Either turn off suspend in which case your batteries will
drain down or just do lots of reboots the way Bill intended it to be.
\_ *** READ http://www.photo.net/photo/film.html ***
\_ yes there is. read today's Chronicle. BAAS (Bay Area
Adult Sites) is an organization to help local porn pushers.
\_ I think 200 is probably the best overall film speed. 800 is too
grainy and is not very good for outdoor pictures. If it's sunny
and you're outside, go 100. If you're indoors, use a flash and
400 or 800 (if you're shooting for something like a football
game at night 800 or higher is preferred). So if you're going to be
shooting indoors and outdoors, day and night, 200 is a pretty good
medium if you don't want to carry around multiple cameras or
multiple rolls of film.
\_ Yeah. I think 800 is best only in that it gives acceptable, not
good, results over vastly different situations. If you have to
shoot indoor without flash as well as outdoor, use 800.
Otherwise, 200 is better if you can use a flash while shooting
indoor. If you have a fast lens or if you don't mind
backgrounds being too dark when shooting indoor with flash,
you can even use 100 film to get finer grains. --- yuen
\_ 1600 b&w can produce some lovely prints
This site (not affiliated with me) also has great camera reviews...
\_ As the above says, it's just windows. win98 won't be that much
better. Either turn off suspend in which case your batteries will
drain down or just do lots of reboots the way Bill intended it to be.
\_ Is there a FAQ telling how to get girls to be naked on film so I
have a porno site and be rich?
\_ Hmmm, I'm glad to be a FDNTHV then. I love my Dreamcast. If
being a victim means having loads of fun from the moment I
and without the hassles. Just bc you were one of the
get my product, then I say Bring On The Hype! I am a
consumerist bastard! I love obeying the media. I want
to be stereotyped and marketed to!
\_ suspend just isn't all that in Win95 ... 98 is better tho |
| 1999/9/7-8 [Consumer/Camera] UID:16477 Activity:nil |
9/7 Any recommendation for a price tracker for analog camera?
\_ http://www.bhphotovideo.com is the biggest photo mail order store.
http://www.cameraworld.com is also a popular one. Their prices are
neither the lowest nor the highest, but they are are good
indicators of current retail prices of various items. -- yuen |
| 1999/9/4-6 [Consumer/Camera] UID:16464 Activity:nil |
9/4 I am shopping for a decent automatic camera that will do justice
to scenes ranging from alpine landscape, Venetian neighborhood,
to Roman ruins. Any suggestions?
\_ http://www.bhphoto.com - best prices/service w/no tax from NY
\_ I really hope that isn't a bh porn site.
I recommend the Olympus Stylus epix, for under $100
Over $100, get a canon EOS sytem Rebel2000, or a
Nikon N6000
\_ i got the stylus epic on the recommendation of a
friend and have been happy with it, though i wish
i'd gotten the one with the zoom. best selling
points are that it's TINY and it has a large
aperture for its size (1:2.8). it's good for
traveling. if you're not concerned about size
though, you can find better.
\_ Thanks. Any URL for comparison and analysis? I used to use
SLR to shoot but that was 10+ years ago and need to relearn.
Hopefully the automatic ones will be versatile enough. |
| 1999/7/21-22 [Consumer/Camera, Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:16177 Activity:very high |
7/20 Is motion-sickness / motion-tolerance genetically bound? And is there
any way to compensate for it? I just saw the Blair Witch Project,
which made me nauseous. My friend actually puked. All the quick
camera motions got to us. We're weak sauce.
\_ I get sick playing most 3D type games (almost all Nintendo 64
games and some others too). I even had difficulty with
Zelda 64. -cdaveb
\_ there is an actual medical term called DIMS - doom-induced
motion sickness. --caliban
\_ There is a genetic predisposition to motion sickness. But is it
really motion sickness if you are not really moving?
\_ there's a difference between motion sickness and IMAX-type
disorientation.
\_ There are actually well documented cases of the relation of
visual motion and physical motion causing severe nausea.
I myself was once on a flight simulator in New York where
the gyroscopic action controlling the simulator was just
slightly out of phase with the video play back.
You've never seen so many people get sick so fast
in your entire life. I would say the same thing is possible
even when you are not moving if your brain is duped by the film.
Try dramamine but my guess is that you should see movies
with stabilized cameras or else bring a barf bag and give your
more hearty friends a good laugh -asa
\_ It helps to sit in the back. Way back. Last row.
\_ Not enough. For the rest of you who have this problem,
wait until it comes out on video and watch
it on a small TV from across a room.
\-anyone ever use the SGI solaris system browser demo ...
at some point i didnt know what i was doing withit as i was
flying through the solar system on a really fast machine and
i felt kinda ill as i was doing these dives into the ecliptic
plane. that was actually pretty fun. --psb
\_ Ginger root powder (you can get it at any pharmacy) helps.
Chinese medicine rules.
\_ Ginger in general calms the stomach. Have some ginger snaps.
\_ Dramamine or Bonine are stronger; antihistamines with strong
antiemetic side effect. Some people say they keep you from
getting dizzy too. But unlike ginger, they taste bad (esp.
Dramamine, yuck), make you tired, may cause stomachache.
\_ All of these remedies have varying levels of effectiveness for
any one person. You have to sample and see. You do get
more tolerant with experience. -jor (boat diver)
\_ Take a hit. Then take another hit if you dont feel anything
\_ This kind of motion sickness is caused because your brain is
getting conflicting reports about movement: your eyes say it's
going on, but the rest of your senses contradict that. I'm
not sure dramimine would help. |
| 1999/1/6-7 [Consumer/Camera, Finance/Shopping] UID:15176 Activity:high |
1/3 I'm planning to co-locate a server (with 13 gig of HD). What is a
good and really cheap affordable backup tape drive I can buy, with good
Linux drivers?
\_ Basically, DLT > 8mm (Exabyte || AIT) or 4mm (DAT)
In my opinion, you're better off with even a DLT2000
than an Exabyte (reliability sux) or a DAT drive (reliability
also wanx) because in my 4 years x.p. in the backup field,
never once have I seen a DLT drive fail. If it's cleaned
properly, write errors are few. The newer AIT drives are
better than Exabyte's (incidentally, Exabyte declined SONY
the right to OEM there brand, hence AIT was formed) in
terms of quality and performance, however, the price is not
cheap, nor has the basic architecture of 8mm changed---tape
path from hell. The DLT has a much more natural (fewer
winding heads, less tape tention) tape path than 8mm or even
DAT. The newer DLT7000 drives easily get 5MB/sec native
compression (non-compression). AIT and the newest DDS3 hum
around 3MB/sec. Tape drive makers claim you can get 2:1
hardware compression if you turn it on (i.e. double your
performance to 10MB/sec), but this depends on how compress-
able your data is (bitmaps, text, database) and it increases
wear-and-tear on the drive heads (they must stop-and-wait-
for-data-compression-write-stop-repeat). If I had a choice
between 8mm and 4mm, I'd actually go with the 4mm - 8mm is
not any more realiable to be worth the extra $pacebux. Let
me know if you need software.
And next time, sign your name so I can send email to you.
-mtbb
\_ I've never seen an Exabyte fail except for single tape that
had been severely abused. How often have you seen Exabyte
failures?
\_ When DLT 2000s & 4000s were coming out, all the
vendors of Exabytes were sick of the piles of RMAs.
Once they began shipping DLTs instead of Exabytes,
all-the-sudden, those RMAs disappeared. The problem
with Exabyte drives is the Tape Path From Hell. It
wears down the tape, the drive heads, and since there
are more moving parts, there is a much greater chance
of tapes being eaten up, read/write heads breaking,
etc. I have never seen a DLT drive eat a tape like
an Exabyte. AIT seems to have solved some of these
issues by reducing the number of spindles and creating
a better tape path and integrating memory chips into
the tapes themselves (helps load and seek times).
While DLT7000s are still quite pricy, I think the
best price/performance deal on the market is the
DLT2000XT. If you want 8mm, avoid the 85xx and 87xx
series. The 8900 (Mammoth) drive is fair, but
expensive. I worked for a year and a half at a backup
hardware/software re-seller, then for another two and
half years at a backup software company. With drives I
personally handled, I had no failures with DLT, 1/1
Mammoth had problems loading tapes, 1/1 8700 broke twice
and uncountable 8500/8505 drive failures. As for DAT
only a few problems with those drives.
\_ Any brand-name standard SCSI DAT drive (Seagate, HP, ...). You
might want to ask whether there have been problems with a
particular model you're considering.
\_ DAT absolutely sucks. Get the cheap DLT drive or AIT. -tom
\_ Ive read alot of stuff about how DATs are bad, but I've used
the Eliant 820 8mm from Exabyte and haven't had any probs w/
it thus far, in fact it backs up http://www.housing.berkeley.edu --sly
\_ DAT is 4mm, not 8mm. The old 8mm Exabyte stuff sucks
pretty bad too but the newer may be better. I'm skeptical
of AIT. DLT is much more reliable, but $$$ and the tapes
and drives are big. If you just want something dirt cheap
the 1/4" drives work ok for occasional backups, but the
tapes are expensive. DAT is ok if the environment is
good and you keep everything clean. -phr
\_ we have DAT tapes in machine rooms that we clean
twice monthly and use new tapes every 3 months and
still have horrible reliability. -tom
\_ Yeah, but have you ever successfully done a restore? -ausman
\_ What about 8mm tapes like Exabyte?
\_ What do you think AIT is? --dim
\_ there are lotsa differences btwn normal 8mm and
AIT dipshit.. a cheap AIT drive is prob the best
solution.. dlt 4000 is prob good too but prob
gon be a bit more expensive but every bit as good
-shac
\_ Is AIT an 8mm format or isn't it? --dim
\_ AIT uses 8mm tapes but it's not compatible with old-style
exabyte formats. -tom |
| 1998/8/20 [Consumer/Camera] UID:14490 Activity:nil |
8/19 Out of curiosity, anybody have a favorite $400-800 digital camera that
they can recommend? I just checked http://zdnet.com/products/camerauser and
I'm caught in a deluge of info. This is a gift item for somebody
like yourself.
\_ Sony's X-Ray vision cameras!
\_ http://www.dcresource.com |
| 1998/8/14 [Consumer/Camera] UID:14458 Activity:moderate |
8/13 Woohoo! Sony develops see through clothes video camera!
\_ I heard it on AM740 too. Any URL?
\_ You're late. They already took it off the market. This was
"news" 3 days ago. WAKE UP OUT THERE!
\_ There are still some 80 thousand(?) of them floating
around, so the next time you are walking around
Fisherman's Wharf and a tourist aims his camera at
you...
\_ I deck him and have him arrested. |
| 1998/4/3-6 [Consumer/Camera] UID:13896 Activity:high |
4/3 Can someone explain something about digital cameras? What format
do they save images in (JPG? GIF? BMP?)? And can I take these
saved files to a film shop and have them print them on regular old
Kodak paper? (Any ideas how much that would cost?)
\_ Image format depends on the kind of camera you're using. The Kodak
camera I used saved images internally in TIFF/EP, and came with
software that let you download to the host computer and save in the
format of your choice. You _can_ print digital images to normal
light-sensitive photo paper, but you'll probably end up using a
dye-sublimation printer instead. _Media_ cost for a dye-sub
printer is about $3-$4/page, I don't know what a service bureau
would charge you on top of that. -- kahogan
\_ The quality of images printed from a digital camera will also
be much lower than a real photograph. Most models without
exorbitant costs are intended for WWW work, not printing or
design, and you will probably notice.
\_ megapixel cameras, which have quality as good as typical
point-and-shoot cameras, have come down into the $500 range
\_ I stand corrected. -- 1-year-old digital camera owner
\_ I used a Sony DSC-1 (Digital Still Camera) last month.
This costs $400, and stores 33 640x480 (16-bit color?) images
in JPEG format on 4 MB internal flash memory. Transfer to PC
is via supplied cable to a serial port at 38400 bps. Image
quality ranges from 30-80% (depending on how still you hold the
camera) of a $50 35mm camera. I agree that 1024x800 cameras
are a better bet for 35mm quality, and most come with zoom.
I agree cameras like the DSC-1 would be good for WWW work.
-jctwu
\_ http://www.dcresource.com is a good source of info -tom |
| 1998/3/17 [Consumer/PDA, Consumer/Camera] UID:13820 Activity:high |
3/16 My Sony camcorder's tape is stuck inside. The eject button does
not work so I cannot get the tape out. On screen it shows there is
a red tape button. Does anyone also have this problem??How to fix?
\_ Try smashing it on the ground and see if you can get the tape
out that way. Remember to use a _hard_ surface (e.g., concrete).
\_ I'll fix it if I can keep the tape of your nekkid gf doing those
four dudes. |
| 1998/3/13-17 [Consumer/Camera, Consumer/PDA] UID:13801 Activity:low 71%like:13798 |
3/13 Does anybody know how to repair the tape transport of a Sony camcorder
or know somebody who is an expert doing this? Thanks.
\_ try Resistance Repair... in west Berkeley.
\_ guerilla repairmen?
\_ Brazil?
\_ yes. but before you can hire one, you need
to fill out a 27B/6. have you got one, then?
no? well, dont come back till you do! |
| 1998/3/9-10 [Consumer/Camera] UID:13778 Activity:very high |
3/8 ok more goodies for sale. Brand new Sharp digital Camera. I
bought 2...but my friend backed out. So it's 3 days old.
4 MB flash memory, 120 pictures max, 2.5" TTF screen, 640x480 res.
TV output, doubles as digital video camera for vdo conferencing.
$599 retail. Give me a price! I''m gonna have to eat this one.
-hitran
\_ Some friend.... 3 days old? Return it. This is America, God
Damn It! You have the natural born right to return anything you
damn well please for no reason at all, get a full refund, *and*
an apology from a pimply faced clerk for their having sold you a
product you didn't desire.
\_ he either bought it from one of those shady electronics shops
in chinatown, or it's hot, or both. --aaron
\_ Then he deserves to be screwed.
\_ HITRAN DESERVES TO BE SCREWED!!! |
| 1998/2/17-18 [Finance/Shopping, Consumer/Camera] UID:13688 Activity:high |
2/17 where can i get 6 rolls of 35mm negatives reprint, cheap? -jwang
\_ Price Club / Costco. Even if you choose Kodak processing, it's
still cheaper than Kodak processing in drug stores. --- yuen
\_ If you don't mind hundreds of people pawing through the racks
to find their film, ruining yours.
\_ You get what you pay for. |
| 1998/2/3 [Consumer/Camera] UID:13613 Activity:high |
2/3 Did aspolito ever get a camera for his gay home videos?
\_ I mailed him offering mine, but he never responded. He must be too
busy rehearsing. |
| 1998/1/30-2/2 [Consumer/Camera, Recreation/Dating] UID:13599 Activity:high |
1/29 Once again I'm begging for use of a video camera. This
is for a class project (Anthro 138B Ethnographic Filmaking) with
two other people and will NOT i repeat NOT be used for any sort
of porn, straight or gay. (Not sure why I have to say this but
for some reason you sodans seem to think I'm some sex fiend)
-aspolito
\_ Yer filming me aren't you. What am I, a hermaphrodite?
my grandiose body parts not naked enough for you?
\_ So you're going to film yourself and other men of non-white
ethnic origins having sexual relations?
\_ porn for a female audience is known as "erotica" - danh
\_ I'm male and I like "erotica". Does that make me female?
- Gender Confused?
\_ No, it just makes you tawei.
\_ Cant you get one from work or somewhere?
\_ If I could do you tihnk I'd be begging on the motd? -aspo
\_ how about Good Guys?
\_ "My gay lover and I bought this camera together to take sexually
explicit videos of each other -- but he ran away two weeks ago
to join the crew of a shrimp boat, so I don't need it anymore.
Your return policy covers this, right?"
\_ aspo, don't hide our love behind (heh) lies. Tell em it's for us
to record our deep (heh) love for all times. We'll have B5 and
Gayboy night at Nick's. (No offense intended towards Nick).
\_ Yeah. You like the attention. Go rent one. Or buy one, use
it, return it. Or better yet, drop the class and get a life. |
| 1993/8/10 [Consumer/Camera, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA] UID:31381 Activity:nil |
8/9 Did someone leave a roll of (used)FujiColor 400/24exp film in the csua?
I lost a roll a while back and was wondering if this was mine. --psb |
| 12/24 |