Photoshop How To Use: rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 9 topics

rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Eight Reasons that a Camera Phone is better than a D-SLR - 1 messages, 1
author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7ebfa21b75b07493?hl=en
* P&S Teleconverters - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7244992722f7a3f8?hl=en
* Red Drool - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/485e826a7c4e7569?hl=en
* camera shake - quantifying? - 4 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/d3513b4241587a4b?hl=en
* Full review available now Re: Panasonic G1 - some AF numbers - 6 messages, 5
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/380eee98b6f748d1?hl=en
* Response to P&S reasons list - 4 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a54d4f54a92e6ebf?hl=en
* strom anbieter im internet stromanbieter preisvergleich strompreise guenstig
strom und guenstiger stromanbieter fuer - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/e1da7cd972809a5e?hl=en
* Red - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79eeb5c2feb0566f?hl=en
* Do not buy gadgets having proprietary batteries - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/63eb5d15579b0077?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Eight Reasons that a Camera Phone is better than a D-SLR
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7ebfa21b75b07493?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 12:05 am
From: "Fred"

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:CHZSk.8429$ZP4.7515@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
> 1. You Always Shoot in Bright Light.
>
> Cell phone cameras produce unbelievable results when used in bright
> sunlight. You have no need for a large sensor that can produce excellent
> results in poor lighting conditions.
>
> 2. You Want Don't Want a Battery Draining Xenon Flash Tube.
>
> Flash photography is for wimps. You have no need for complicated,
> battery-draining flashes.
>
> 3. You don't want to lug around complicated lenses.
>
> Camera phones have lenses made out of the finest Chinese plastic. Why lug
> around a huge lens with all those complicated motors and controls.
>
> 4. You long for your Instamatic with its "Focus-Free" lens.
>
> Camera phones don't have complicated auto-focusing motors, or even the
> ability to manually focus. What you see is what you get. If you can't get
> the picture then you didn't need it anyway.
>
> 5. You Need Fast Start-Up.
>
> Your phone is always on, so your camera is always ready. No complicated
> power buttons.
>
> 6. Color quality is unimportant.
>
> You've had it with cameras that show proper skin tone and are capable of
> wide dynamic range. You like the inaccuracies of a tiny sensor.
>
> 7. Prints are so 20th Century.
>
> Not only do you not care about 8x10's, you don't even want a 4x6.
> E-mailing photos to your friends is sufficient.
>
> 8. Cost.
>
> You get a new camera in your phone every two years for free.
>
>
LOL

Hilarious!

The DSLR brigade are so uptight they even think that this is serious!!!!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: P&S Teleconverters
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7244992722f7a3f8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 12:24 am
From: "David J Taylor"

RichA wrote:
> ALL p&s's have sub-par lenses, all of them. That won't change.

But the lenses may be adequate for the job, even if not reaching your high
standards.

David

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 6:54 am
From: glen thomas

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 21:30:31 -0500, "RichA" <obama@haslittletime.com> wrote:

>ALL p&s's have sub-par lenses, all of them. That won't change.

Many points outlined below completely disprove your usual resident-troll
bullshit. You can either read it and educate yourself, or don't read it and
continue to prove to everyone that you are nothing but a virtual-photographer
newsgroup-troll and a fool.

1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent
wide-angle and telephoto (tel-extender) add-on lenses for many makes and models
of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your photography
gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can far surpass any
range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or will ever be made for
larger format cameras.

2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any
DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used with
high-quality tel-extenders, which by the way, do not reduce the lens' original
aperture one bit. Only DSLRs suffer from that problem due to the manner in which
their tele-converters work. They can also have higher quality full-frame
180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than any
DSLR and its glass in existence. Some excellent fish-eye adapters can be added
to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic-aberration nor
edge-softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this allows you to
seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm equivalent focal-length
up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own lens.

3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger
sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic Range vs. an
APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg

4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent) sensors
used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much smaller.
Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs. This also
allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than DSLR glass which is
only good for one aperture setting per lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S
glass can out-resolve even the best DSLR glass ever made. After all is said and
done, you will spend 1/4th to 1/50th the price that you would have to in order
to get comparable performance in a DSLR camera. When you buy a DSLR you are
investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips, external
flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc. etc. The
outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial DSLR body
purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their banks.

5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera plus one
small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing just a couple
pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would require over 10 to 20
pounds of DSLR body and lenses. You can carry the whole P&S kit in one roomy
pocket of a wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy
backpack. You also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to
stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive
lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most
inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.

6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer, you
will not be barred from using your camera at public events, stage-performances,
and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots, you won't so easily
alert all those within a block around, from the obnoxious noise that your DSLR
is making, that you are capturing anyone's images. For the more dedicated
wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not endanger your life when
photographing potentially dangerous animals by alerting them to your presence.

7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which
allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms
response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you may
capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where any
evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance. Without the
need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware into remote
areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time allotted for bringing
back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for unattended time-lapse
photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you may capture those unusual
or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a rare slime-mold's propagation,
that you happened to find in a mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest
laptop or other time-lapse hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that
CHDK brings to the creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to
list them all here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )

8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See:
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast subject
motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the need of
artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone. Nor will
their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane shutter
distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when photographed with all
DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions example-image link in #10.)

9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including shutter-speeds
of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g.
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_%26_Flash-Sync without
the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter flash-units that
must strobe for the full duration of the shutter's curtain to pass over the
frame. The other downside to those kinds of flash units, is that the
light-output is greatly reduced the faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed
used that is faster than your camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the
flash output. Not so when using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash
is recorded no matter the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK
capable cameras where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the
lightning-fast single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is
1/10,000 of a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a
second, then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also
don't require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may
be used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that can
compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example:
http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html

10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions
(focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortions.jpg
do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground, 90-degrees
from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously loud slapping
mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily damaged, expensive
repair costs, etc.

11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're not
worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed
shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete while you do, and
not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos that day from having
gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous photographer you're no
longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of unneeded glass, allowing you to
carry more of the important supplies, like food and water, allowing you to trek
much further than you've ever been able to travel before with your old D/SLR
bricks.

12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF
required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image
destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the
planet can compare in the quality of available-light macro photography that can
be accomplished with nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera.

13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo audio
recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature where a
still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong. E.g. recording
the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living field-mice. With your
P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't miss that once-in-a-lifetime
chance to record some unexpected event, like the passage of a bright meteor in
the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion, or any other newsworthy event. Imagine
the gaping hole in our history of the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras
there at the time. The mystery of how it exploded would have never been solved.
Or the amateur 8mm film of the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready
P&S camera being with you all the time might capture something that will be a
valuable part of human history one day.

14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final
image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your composition by
trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With the ability to
overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area alerts (and dozens of
other important shooting data) directly on your electronic viewfinder display
you are also not going to guess if your exposure might be right this time. Nor
do you have to remove your eye from the view of your subject to check some
external LCD histogram display, ruining your chances of getting that perfect
shot when it happens.

15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural
settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and sensors
that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as light-levels
drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in total darkness by
using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other multi-purpose cameras are
capable of taking still-frame and videos of nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as
well. Shooting videos and still-frames of nocturnal animals in the total-dark,
without disturbing their natural behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away
with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is not only possible, it's been done, many times, by
myself. (An interesting and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly
stomped to death by an irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash
come from.)

16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100%
silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it away
nor changing their natural behavior with your existence. Nor, as previously
mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your direction. You are recording
nature as it is, and should be, not some artificial human-changed distortion of
reality and nature.

17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest
degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its
inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will
EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A leaf-shutter or
electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will capture your moving
subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S photography will no longer lead a
biologist nor other scientist down another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.

18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the
popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly
slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is recorded.
In the hands of an experienced photographer that will always rely on prefocusing
their camera, there is no hit & miss auto-focusing that happens on all
auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This allows you to take advantage of the
faster shutter response times of P&S cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that
if you really want to get every shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in
any camera.

19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately relay
the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate preview of
what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3 seconds or
1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the crisp sharp outlines
of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100% accurately depicted in
your viewfinder before you even record the shot. What you see in a P&S camera is
truly what you get. You won't have to guess in advance at what shutter speed to
use to obtain those artistic effects or those scientifically accurate nature
studies that you require or that your client requires. When testing CHDK P&S
cameras that could have shutter speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was
amazed that I could half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a
Dremel-Drill's 30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real
time, without ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when
lowering shutter speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls,
instantly seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never
realize what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and
wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.

20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of its
own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender on the
front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would with a DSLR.
Framing and the included background is relative to the subject at the time and
has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens in use. Your f/ratio
(which determines your depth-of-field), is a computation of focal-length divided
by aperture diameter. Increase the focal-length and you make your DOF shallower.
No different than opening up the aperture to accomplish the same. The two
methods are identically related where DOF is concerned.

21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with
just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25
and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S camera can't
go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S camera can have
larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in existence. The time
when you really need a fast lens to prevent camera-shake that gets amplified at
those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs you can take perfectly fine hand-held
images at super-zoom settings. Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures
at long focal lengths require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They
need high ISOs, you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are
some excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to
ISO1600 and more.

22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way
determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of around
$100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today. IF they
have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award winning photograph with
a cardboard Brownie Box camera made a century ago. If you can't take excellent
photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able to get good photos on a DSLR
either. Never blame your inability to obtain a good photograph on the kind of
camera that you own. Those who claim they NEED a DSLR are only fooling
themselves and all others. These are the same people that buy a new camera every
year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only had the right camera, a better camera,
better lenses, faster lenses, then I will be a great photographer!" Camera
company's love these people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will
make their photography better, because they never were a good photographer to
begin with. The irony is that by them thinking that they only need to throw
money at the problem, they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real
problem is. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why these
self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras instantly reveal to
them their piss-poor photography skills.

23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S
photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera gear.
They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile and tell
them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the look on their
face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that lost money, and a
sadness just courses through every fiber of their being. Wondering why they
can't get photographs as good after they spent all that time and money. Get good
on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun experience.

24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning
the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly
ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning
photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust,
and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag, hoping
that you'll lug it around again some day.

25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not
advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you. That's
like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS STUPID AND I
DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only take it out when
needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with all your photos. And
should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're not out $20,000. They are
inexpensive to replace.

There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than
enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just
better, all around. No doubt about it.

The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just
one short phrase:

"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
foolish thing."

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Red Drool
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/485e826a7c4e7569?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 1:34 am
From: bugbear

David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>> What RED is doing is _good_ for all of us who espouse FF cameras. There
>> was one. Then two. Now three and next year a fourth FF player.
>
> I don't get the interest in Red in dSLR/dcam circles. It makes the heaviest
> and most awkward of the MF + back combinations seem svelte, and probably
> affordable by the time you've actually put a system together.

Yeah - modular is only a benefit if at least
some of the combinations are either unavailable
otherwise, or more expensive otherwise.

Modularity (having to design and manufacture
all those joints and connectors, both
optical, mechanical and electrical)
always increases costs.

BugBear

==============================================================================
TOPIC: camera shake - quantifying?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/d3513b4241587a4b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 1:35 am
From: bugbear

ArlanHansen wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:59:28 +0000, bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim>
> wrote:
>
>> I can find lots of discussions on "circle of confusion"
>> and "depth of field", and quite a bit on "diffraction limits".
>>
>> (e.g.
>> http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/tech/dof.html
>> )
>>
>> Can anyone point me at a reasonable technical
>> discussion on camera shake in relation
>> to pixel errors?
>>
>> In particular resolution versus shutter speed?
>>
>> Clearly (!?) a very low res camera (.e.g 640x480)
>> is much more tolerant of camera shake than a Megavision
>> (
>> http://www.findatlantis.com/wiki/index.php/Keeping_it_Sharp
>> )
>>
>> Since camera shake can be reasonably expressed
>> as angular movement of the camera, the relationship
>> between pixel count and lens length appears key,
>> but the maths is beyond me.
>>
>> I know the old rule says 1/focal length as shutter speed
>> for hand held, but that rule (it appears to me) ASSUMES
>> some constant sensor resolution.
>>
>> Can anyone point me at an analysis?
>>
>> BugBear
>
> I can't (because it's never been a concern of mine, so I never researched it).
> But I can tell you that sub-pixel-width shake can be used to great advantage to
> create ultra-high resolution photos, far surpassing the camera's available
> resolution. When using programs like PhotoAcute Studio you are able to use
> stacked images that vary in sub-pixel differences to greatly increase all detail
> in any scene. For a quick sample see:
> http://www.photoacute.com/studio/examples/screenshot/index.html
>
> I thought it was worth mentioning in your quest for camera-shake info. You'd be
> surprised what kind of lemonade you can make out of previously-thought-of lemons
> with a little knowledge. :)
>
> This is why I never throw away any of my photographic "accidents" anymore. I
> stopped hitting the occasional "delete" when reviewing my photos for the last 5
> years. Between utilities like this and Fourier-transform utilities to refocus
> blurry images or undo camera-shake on single frames, who knows how those "fatal
> photographs" can be put to great use 10 years from now. The bokeh from stacked
> images taken from only one vantage point can even be used to create 3D scenes
> when using simple utilities like Picolay freeware. Ain't digital wonderful?

Wondefully interesting, and delightfully irrelevant to my question.

Splendid!

BugBear

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 1:39 am
From: bugbear

Chris Malcolm wrote:
> bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>
>> I know the old rule says 1/focal length as shutter speed
>> for hand held, but that rule (it appears to me) ASSUMES
>> some constant sensor resolution.
>
>> Can anyone point me at an analysis?
>
> It also assumes a certain value of hand shake, which varies from grip
> to grip and person to person, and possibly with temperature and
> certainly with wind. I personally found it a useful rule for images up
> to about 3MP and A5 print size, which I had to adapt proportionally
> for higher resolutions. Your camera in your hands is very likely
> different. You don't want analysis, you simply need to experiment with
> your own hands and camera.

Actually I do want analysis, since I want to be able
to make predictions about equipment to buy that I don't already
own.

And I'm not just talking about hand-held.

With long lenses and high res sensors,
one needs to consider HOW rigid a tripod
is needed, since most tripods are not absolutely
rigid, merely rigid enough for typical use.

BugBear

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 6:17 am
From: Don Stauffer

I do have it in terms of mtf. What it is is an actual mtf curve for the
results of camera angular vibration. It still takes a lot of math to use
it- one must multiply the rest of the system mtf by the mtf of image
motion, for each spatial frequency in the range.

This curve was done by Perkin Elmer, who makes reconnaiscence cameras
for the military.

bugbear wrote:
> I can find lots of discussions on "circle of confusion"
> and "depth of field", and quite a bit on "diffraction limits".
>
> (e.g.
> http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/tech/dof.html
> )
>
> Can anyone point me at a reasonable technical
> discussion on camera shake in relation
> to pixel errors?
>
> In particular resolution versus shutter speed?
>
> Clearly (!?) a very low res camera (.e.g 640x480)
> is much more tolerant of camera shake than a Megavision
> (
> http://www.findatlantis.com/wiki/index.php/Keeping_it_Sharp
> )
>
> Since camera shake can be reasonably expressed
> as angular movement of the camera, the relationship
> between pixel count and lens length appears key,
> but the maths is beyond me.
>
> I know the old rule says 1/focal length as shutter speed
> for hand held, but that rule (it appears to me) ASSUMES
> some constant sensor resolution.
>
> Can anyone point me at an analysis?
>
> BugBear

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 6:21 am
From: Don Stauffer

Most image motion analysis I have seen simplifies and assumes a
sinusoidal motion of some given amplitude. That was originally done for
vehicle vibration in camera sensors mounted to airplanes, but I suspect
that a sinusoidal vibration is not too bad an approximation for hand
vibration also. The key again is the amplitude estimate.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Full review available now Re: Panasonic G1 - some AF numbers
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/380eee98b6f748d1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 1:38 am
From: Mark Thomas

Full review now up:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG1/DMCG1A.HTM

Gets a pretty good wrap..

I'll bet dpreview will be a little annoyed they were beaten, and will be
not far behind.

Mark Thomas wrote:
> For those watching this rather interesting camera, Imaging Resource has
> some numbers from a production model.
>
> The G1's AF lag is around 0.35-0.39s.
>
> To put that into perspective, Canon 40D is ~0.13s, Sony A200 ~0.19s,
> Nikon D60 ~0.26s, Olympus E420 ~0.14s...
>
> Not quite up to dslr speed, but not too shabby. Compared to p&s
> cameras, the Oly SP550 is 1.1-1.5s, Pan FZ18 ~0.5s, Canon G9 ~0.6s.
>
> Be interesting to see how the rest of this camera pans out. I'm looking
> forward to having a good hard look at that EVF...

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 3:18 am
From: dj_nme

Mark Thomas wrote:
> Full review now up:
>
> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG1/DMCG1A.HTM
>
> Gets a pretty good wrap..
>
> I'll bet dpreview will be a little annoyed they were beaten, and will be
> not far behind.

The Panasonic DMC-G1 isn't a DSLR camera nor is it a Canon camera, so
I'm not so sure that depreview.com will be rushing to do a full review
any time soon.

== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 5:29 am
From: Steve

On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:38:50 +1000, Mark Thomas
<markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com> wrote:

>Full review now up:
>
>http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG1/DMCG1A.HTM
>
>Gets a pretty good wrap..

Not bad, but still a few problems. Most comparisions to it are
similar to existing cameras so I concentrate on things that are
different, like sensor size, EVF vs. OVF, etc.

Obviously, the high ISO performance wasn't as good as the Rebel XSi.
That's to be expected due to the smaller sensor and higher pixel
density. Is a slightly smaller body/lens worth that when it's not
really smaller enough to change it's portability? Personally I don't
think so. But some might.

I'm kind of dissapointed with the EVF. It's only 800x600 resolution.
I'd want to see "high def" resolution 1920x1080, or at that 4:3 aspect
ratio maybe double it to 1600x1200 before it could come close to
matching the detail you might see in an OVF.

Also, from the review:
"Another difference between the EVF and the LCD is the relative
contrast ratio. When looking through the EVF at a scene with a high
contrast ratio, detail in shadow areas falls off abruptly into
relative blackness, while the same shadow scene on the LCD still holds
detail. It's just a difference in the amount of contrast the LCOS chip
inside is able to display compared to the LCD."

Is that going to lead people to use the LCD and have to hold the
camera out at arm's length? Probably not. The EVF may be good enough
for framing, but I'd like to see something at least approaching a good
OVF if this really is the wave of the future.

Also, the reviewer says that there's a noticable time lag between real
time and what you see in the EVF. To me, that's unacceptable and
absolutely must be improved before I'll use an EVF. That just adds to
the already slower shutter lag from a DSLR.

And no live view when shooting in continious mode, only the captured
shots at the frame rate? Seems like that would make tracking a fast
subject (just when you'd want to use continuous shooting) very
difficult.

If this camera has the best EVF that's available (which it seems to),
then EVF's still have a way to go.

Also, the screen blanks out before taking an exposure so the shutter
can close and then re-open during exposure. That doesn't solve the
problem of the short screen blank on a DSLR to move the mirror out of
the way. I would hope that new technology can solve old problems but
this one hasn't.

So the main conclusions I get from reading that review is that in most
respects, it's not all that much different than something like the
Rebel XSi. It's main benefit is that it's a bit smaller but not
enough so to make a major difference in portability. But it has
several detrements such as noticeably lower image quality at high ISO,
slower AF, and a good EVF but not nearly up to OVF standards in terms
of image quality and ability to track a moving subject.

I seriously hope their next effort is better. This one could be fun
for early adopters and techogeeks. But for photographers I don't
think it's ready for prime time.

Steve

== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 5:43 am
From: SMS

Steve wrote:

<snip>

> Also, from the review:
> "Another difference between the EVF and the LCD is the relative
> contrast ratio. When looking through the EVF at a scene with a high
> contrast ratio, detail in shadow areas falls off abruptly into
> relative blackness, while the same shadow scene on the LCD still holds
> detail. It's just a difference in the amount of contrast the LCOS chip
> inside is able to display compared to the LCD.

Yes, you're faced with the choice of holding the camera wrong and using
the LCD (if it's not washed out by sunlight) or using the crappy EVF.
You can tell that their target market isn't anyone that's ever used an
SLR optical viewfinder!

> Is that going to lead people to use the LCD and have to hold the
> camera out at arm's length? Probably not. The EVF may be good enough
> for framing, but I'd like to see something at least approaching a good
> OVF if this really is the wave of the future.

Won't happen. Too expensive to duplicate the functionality of an optical
viewfinder with a faster and higher resolution EVF.

> Also, the reviewer says that there's a noticable time lag between real
> time and what you see in the EVF. To me, that's unacceptable and
> absolutely must be improved before I'll use an EVF. That just adds to
> the already slower shutter lag from a DSLR.

Optical viewfinders will always be better, but this is a glorified P&S
camera. It would have been too expensive to include an accurate optical
viewfinder, though considering the price, they could have afforded it!

> So the main conclusions I get from reading that review is that in most
> respects, it's not all that much different than something like the
> Rebel XSi.

In reality it's quite different. With the XSi you get an optical
viewfinder, much faster AF, a much better selection of lenses, the list
goes on and on.

> I seriously hope their next effort is better. This one could be fun
> for early adopters and techogeeks. But for photographers I don't
> think it's ready for prime time.

Early adopters moved on to D-SLRs years ago. Technogeeks buy products
that at least have the potential to become cult products.

The G1 could succeed, but they'll have to price it at around $300.

== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 6:26 am
From: SMS

dj_nme wrote:

> The Panasonic DMC-G1 isn't a DSLR camera nor is it a Canon camera, so
> I'm not so sure that depreview.com will be rushing to do a full review
> any time soon.

In the last 12 months, dpreview has reviewed the following brands:

Ricoh: 1
Sigma: 1
Panasonic: 2
Pentax: 2
Fuji: 3
Olympus: 5
Nikon: 6
Sony: 6
Canon: 8

Since Canon is by far the largest manufacturer of digital cameras, they
actually should have 10 or 11 Canon reviews in order to be fair. Based
on Panasonic's market share, they've been reviewing too many Panasonic
models. Yet dpreview has a preview of the G1, which means a full review
is coming.

They've even reviewed cameras like the Sigma DP1 so they don't just
review cameras from large manufacturers. The DP1 earned their lowest
rating of "above average,"

They do seem to be D-SLR heavy in their recent reviews, but remember
that D-SLRs are the fastest growing segment of the digital camera
market, while P&S models have peaked in terms of features and quality,
and now are actually going the other way, as manufacturers rush to
cost-reduce their P&S models.

== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 7:05 am
From: Harvey-D

On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 06:26:07 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>market, while P&S models have peaked in terms of features and quality,
>and now are actually going the other way, as manufacturers rush to
>cost-reduce their P&S models.

There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than
enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just
better, all around. No doubt about it.

The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just
one short phrase:

"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
foolish thing."

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Response to P&S reasons list
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a54d4f54a92e6ebf?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 1:54 am
From: old.salt@cmaaccess.com

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 06:14:20 -0600, HowardSandler
<howardsandler@hsinc.com> wrote:

>Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server

Just to let folks here know, AIOE is trying to block his spam
from there site. So they are responding to deal with this issue.
--
I hope you like my photos at www.myspace.com/osalt
If you would like to buy one, e-mail me, prints up
to 30x20 inches.

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 5:31 am
From: SMS

old.salt@cmaaccess.com wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 06:14:20 -0600, HowardSandler
> <howardsandler@hsinc.com> wrote:
>
>> Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
>
> Just to let folks here know, AIOE is trying to block his spam
> from there site. So they are responding to deal with this issue.

And if they block him, he'll simply use another provider.

We've seen this problem in other groups I've been active in, and it
really is not something most ISPs care about. We had someone in
alt.cellular.attws who continually posted a Usenet charter from a
different Usenet newsgroup in order to annoy everyone. He was simple to
kill-file since at least he only had two e-mail addresses that he used.
Several people complained to his ISP (or they said that they did) which
of course did nothing. ISPs don't have time to moderate petty Usenet
arguments.

Our current troll is harder to kill file, but using newsproxy, and
filtering on one unique header that he either doesn't realize doesn't
change, or that he doesn't know how to change, it's possible to filter
him too.

Try to have compassion. Think of the root cause of his behavior and
rather than getting angry, think about how you would feel if someone you
knew had the same issues.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 6:56 am
From: samual-smith

On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 01:54:34 -0800, old.salt@cmaaccess.com wrote:

>On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 06:14:20 -0600, HowardSandler
><howardsandler@hsinc.com> wrote:
>
>>Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
>
> Just to let folks here know, AIOE is trying to block his spam
>from there site. So they are responding to deal with this issue.

Dear Resident-Troll,

Your post is completely off-topic. Here are some topics that befit this
newsgroup. Please consider them for future discussions and posts:

There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than
enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just
better, all around. No doubt about it.

The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just
one short phrase:

"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
foolish thing."

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 6:58 am
From: bob parker

On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 05:31:04 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>old.salt@cmaaccess.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 06:14:20 -0600, HowardSandler
>> <howardsandler@hsinc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
>>
>> Just to let folks here know, AIOE is trying to block his spam
>> from there site. So they are responding to deal with this issue.
>
>And if they block him, he'll simply use another provider.
>
>We've seen this problem in other groups I've been active in, and it
>really is not something most ISPs care about. We had someone in
>alt.cellular.attws who continually posted a Usenet charter from a
>different Usenet newsgroup in order to annoy everyone. He was simple to
>kill-file since at least he only had two e-mail addresses that he used.
>Several people complained to his ISP (or they said that they did) which
>of course did nothing. ISPs don't have time to moderate petty Usenet
>arguments.
>
>Our current troll is harder to kill file, but using newsproxy, and
>filtering on one unique header that he either doesn't realize doesn't
>change, or that he doesn't know how to change, it's possible to filter
>him too.
>
>Try to have compassion. Think of the root cause of his behavior and
>rather than getting angry, think about how you would feel if someone you
>knew had the same issues.

Dear Resident-Troll,

Your post is completely off-topic. Here are some topics that befit this
newsgroup. Please consider them for future discussions and posts:

There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than
enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just
better, all around. No doubt about it.

The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just
one short phrase:

"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
foolish thing."

==============================================================================
TOPIC: strom anbieter im internet stromanbieter preisvergleich strompreise
guenstig strom und guenstiger stromanbieter fuer
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/e1da7cd972809a5e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 4:00 am
From: w2k344@googlemail.com

strom anbieter im internet stromanbieter preisvergleich strompreise
guenstig strom und guenstiger stromanbieter fuer

+
+
+
+
+++ BILLIGER STROM ONLINE +++ STROM GUENSTIG STROMANBIETER VERGLEICH ++
+
+
+
http://WWW.BILLIGER-STROM-GUENSTIG.INFO
http://WWW.BILLIGER-STROM-GUENSTIG.INFO
http://WWW.BILLIGER-STROM-GUENSTIG.INFO
http://WWW.BILLIGER-STROM-GUENSTIG.INFO
http://WWW.BILLIGER-STROM-GUENSTIG.INFO
http://WWW.BILLIGER-STROM-GUENSTIG.INFO
http://WWW.BILLIGER-STROM-GUENSTIG.INFO
http://WWW.BILLIGER-STROM-GUENSTIG.INFO
http://WWW.BILLIGER-STROM-GUENSTIG.INFO
+
+
+
+

stromanbieter muenchen billiger strom berlin
stromanbieter mit nachttarif billiger strom fuer
stromanbieter region strompreise in oesterreich
billiger strom hamburg www billiger strom fuer
stromanbieter rechner triangel stromanbieter
billiger strom und gas b wie billiger strom
strom gas anbieter wechseln strom gas anbieter vergleich
tarifvergleich strompreise strompreise deutschland

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Red
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79eeb5c2feb0566f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 4:59 am
From: "HEMI-Powered"

Eric Stevens added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

>>More info about the new RED DSLR
>>http://www.pdnpulse.com/2008/11/thoughts-on-the-red-annoucement
>>-from-a-red-one-user.html
>
> Oops! I left out http://www.red.com/epic_scarlet/
>
for a minute I thought you meant the Reds, i.e., the Communists!
<grin>

--
HP, aka Jerry

"A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking
real money" - Attributed to Sen. Everett Dirksen

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 6:25 am
From: Don Stauffer

Eric Stevens wrote:
> More info about the new RED DSLR
> http://www.pdnpulse.com/2008/11/thoughts-on-the-red-annoucement-from-a-red-one-user.html
>
>
>
> Eric Stevens

Who in the world is Red One? I guess I've led a sheltered life, but I
have never heard of them.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Do not buy gadgets having proprietary batteries
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/63eb5d15579b0077?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 5:14 am
From: SMS

simple.language.yahoo@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

While the proprietary nature of these Li-Ion batteries may be
undesirable, there are overwhelming advantages to using Li-Ion batteries
to something like NiMH AA batteries in devices such as cameras.

This was illustrated once again to me this week:

Two of my BP511 batteries, after 4 years, stopped holding a charge for
long enough. These are used in my D-SLR, my camcorder, and an old P&S
camera that I still use (G2).

On Wednesday at 4 p.m. I ordered three 2000mAH BP511 batteries (11.99
each), one 4500mAH BP535 (an extended life battery for the camcorder
that is compatible with the BP511 but longer length) for 29.99, and a
spare NB5L battery for my P&S for $10.99. Shipping was free 2 day FedEx.
On Thursday at about 1:45 p.m., FedEx arrived at my office with the
batteries (less than 24 hours).

Let's analyze the cost. a 2000mAH, 7.4V battery pack is 14,800 mWH and
cost $12. Compare that to four 2000mAH, 1.2V Sanyo Eneloop cells at 9600
mWH, which cost $10 from Thomas distributing.

Eneloop AA 4 pack: $10/9600 mWH =0.104¢/mWH
BP511: $12/14,800 mWH=0.081¢/mWH

You can't analyze the cost of the NB5L battery because it would not be
possible to make such a small camera that used AA cells. Similarly, you
can't analyze the cost of the BP535 that way because would not be
practical to make a camcorder that took 14 AA batteries.

Now on the flip side, had I went into Fry's to buy these batteries, both
would have cost more, but the BP511 would have been over 2.5x the price
($30) while the Eneloops would have been only 1.2x the price. OTOH,
there are $6 BP511 batteries available, which I haven't tried,
preferring to order from a supplier that had provided quality product to
me in the past.

This is just the cost of course. If you want to look at the big picture,
Google "nimh versu li-ion" and click on "I'm Feeling Lucky." The
top-rated Google web site on the subject will appear, and it outlines
all the trade-offs of standard NiMH batteries versus proprietary Li-Ion
batteries. OMG, how did my humble site become the #1 Google rated site!

Here's the overview of the pros and cons of each type of battery:

20 Advantages of Li-Ion Batteries over NiMH Batteries

1. Much lower self-discharge rate (except for newer Hybrio and
eneloop NiMH cells, which trade low self-discharge for lower capacity)
2. More charge/discharge cycles
3. Usage pattern and charge regimen is better suited to digital
cameras (and other devices where the usual pattern is partial
discharge/full charge)
4. Self-Discharge rate is constant during the life of the battery
(NiMH batteries steadily increase in self-discharge over the life of the
battery)
5. Greater energy density by weight
6. Greater energy density by volume (AA batteries are not practical
for sub-compact and ultra-compact cameras because of size, and AAA
batteries are not practical because of capacity)
7. Greater number of shots per WH
8. Faster shot to shot times, especially when using flash
9. More convenient to swap and charge than AA cells (no fumbling
with multiple cells, and keeping track of which battery is in which set)*
10. Far better cold weather performance
11. Far better performance at high temperatures
12. Devices using Li-Ion batteries are more reliable than devices
using AA batteries (unlikely to have a battery door flip open and have
the batteries scatter all over)*
13. Li-Ion batteries can be left in devices that are not used for
long periods of time
14. Li-Ion batteries have protection circuitry built into the pack
and do not rely on the charger for this protection
15. Accurate charge level gauge is included in most Li-Ion powered
cameras, but is not possible in NiMH powered cameras (low-battery
indicator only)
16. Li-Ion batteries do not suffer from polarity reversal
17. Li-Ion batteries do not suffer from the "dud" cell problem
18. No need to "Battery Match" cells of similar capacity
19. Rechargeable battery and charger come with the camera, versus
buying a charger and batteries for an AA powered camera
20. Smaller and lighter chargers

* This advantage is over AA batteries in general, not specifically NiMH
AA batteries. The advantage applies to AA batteries of other types as
well (Alkaline, Lithium, etc.).

8 Advantages of NiMH Batteries over Li-Ion Batteries

1. Li-Ion packs are proprietary, you can't substitute disposable AA
cells if your battery goes dead in the middle of nowhere, and you have
no spare battery, and no AC or DC power for charging*
2. Longer shelf life*
3. Faster charging (though high-rate charging significantly reduces
battery life)
4. AA cells will always be available, while less popular Li-Ion
packs may be discontinued*
5. Multiple devices that use AA or AAA cells can share batteries and
chargers (though there are Li-Ion chargers that can charge many
different battery types by the use of adapter plates)*
6. Two NiMH AA cells can be charged, albeit slowly, from a 5 volt
USB port, while larger Li-Ion packs (7.4V) cannot.
7. You can buy NiMH batteries at a good price from stores like
Wal-Mart and Fry's but for Li-Ion you must order the battery packs from
an on-line retailer that specializes in batteries in order to obtain
good quality packs at good prices.
8. Hot Shoe Flash and Camera Can Use the Same Type of Battery

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 5:41 am
From: Mark Thomas

SMS gloated:
> OMG, how did my humble site become the #1 Google rated site!

Read on... My apologies for this off-topic crosspost, but just to cover
all the groups SMS is polluting... here are a few repeated notes for
search engines and anyone tempted to take SMS too seriously, or visit
his famous, highly accoladed websites..

A quick look around shows the following facts - if you can be bothered
reading it, make your own judgment about this person, his real level of
experience, and his morals.

SMS, aka
Steven M. Scharf
scharf.steven@gmail.com
scharf.steven@nordicbicycleproducts.com
scharf.steven@earthlink.com (scharf.steven@linkearth.com)
scharf.steven@earthlink.net (scharf.steven@linkearth.net)
bicycleacademician@nordicgroup.us
chargerexpert@nordicgroup.us
batteryacademician@nordicgroup.us
Digital Camcorder Academician
Digital Camera Academician
Bicycle Academician
Dr. Digital
Dr Sumner C. Roberts
...has an interesting reputation as the author of a multitude of
websites that are created apparently for link-income purposes and usenet
debates, and are then abandoned. Examples of some of his old efforts:
http://www.digitalslrinfo.com (abandoned 2006)
http://nordicgroup.us/fold/ (abandoned 2002)
http://nordicgroup.us/rack.htm (abandoned 2001)
http://nordicgroup.us/chargers/ (? abandoned 2007)
That site rather amusingly states "This is a non-profit, non-commercial
site; I don't sell anything" at the top, yet at the bottom, "The above
links are affiliates and I receive 3-5% compensation from these companies"
http://www.nordicgroup.us/digicam/ (abandoned 2006)
http://nordicgroup.us/camcorder (abandoned 2004)
Again, that one states - "This is a non-commercial, informational site.
Nothing is sold on this site. No advertising is accepted.", yet at the
bottom there are the Amazon and Adorama ads and links and he states "I
receive compensation from these companies"
http://www.nordicgroup.us/tripod/ (abandoned 2003)

Here are some of his other creations:
http://nordicgroup.us/
http://nordicbicycleproducts.com/
http://www.bicyclecoffeesystems.com/
http://bicycleluggageracks.com/
http://bicyclelighting.com/
http://nordicgroup.us/cageboss/
http://nordicgroup.us/commutebike/
http://batterydata.com/

Yes, everything from coffee on your bike to travel tripods and
camcorders and the amazing one-track expertise he shows in recommending
the exact same cameras and batteries to anyone who asks, no matter what
their needs - yes, Mr Scharf is a whiz of all he sees. It's probably
little wonder that he actually doesn't have the time to actually use or
test any of the things he describes or recommends. Are there any image
galleries of his work? No. (Do correct me here, Dr Roberts... er
sorry, I mean Mr Scharf - don't be shy..)

Anyway, his most recent creation appears to be:
http://www.freewebs.com/dslrversusps
This site gained a small burst of notoriety here when Mr Scharf
recommended it.. without declaring it as his. At that time, the site
named the author as the "Digital Camera Academician", a name SMS/Steven
M. Scharf uses elsewhere, eg http://www.nordicgroup.us/digicam/ and on
the dpreview forums. After he was exposed as the author, he got a
little upset and decided to place a number of false 'accolades' on his
site. He misquoted comments from people here (including me). When
*that* was exposed, he changed the names slightly (I'm now "Mark
Thomasville" - how amusing!) and added a few ridiculous ones, presumably
to indicate that it was all just a harmless joke from the start.

Then the name "Digital Camera Academician" vanished from that page and
hey presto, the site is now penned by the self-proclaimed, highly
experienced, "Dr Sumner C. Roberts". Despite his 30 years in the
photography and digital imaging trade, 'Dr Roberts' of course has
absolutely no web history. Gee, do you think it might be SMS still? Out
of interest, in Australia it is illegal to use false identities and
qualifications to deceive - not in the US?

Anyway, here are a few words from Mr Scharf himself:

"Steven M. Scharf is one of Earth's leading experts on bicycle lighting.
An electrical engineer by trade, he enjoys cycling and designing
lighting systems. He lives in Silicon Valley and works for a small
semiconductor company."

"Steven M. Scharf is one of Earth's leading experts on Li-Ion and NiMH
batteries, and chargers. An electrical engineer by trade, he enjoys
cycling and designing bicycle lighting systems. He lives in Silicon
Valley and works for a small semiconductor company"

"Steven Scharf is an electrical engineer living in Silicon Valley,
specializing in portable power design for embedded systems. He has
worked for GTE, Xerox, McDonnell Douglas, Alcatel, National
Semiconductor, and Transmeta."

"Earth's Leading (and only) Authority on Water Bottle Cage Mounting
since 2002"

"Earth's Independent and Authoritative Source for Digital Camera Battery
Information"

"One of Earth's Leading Authorities on Vehicle Racks"

..(only one of them?)

and here's the last word from his very best friend at
http://www.freewebs.com/dslrversusps:

"Dr. Digital is Dr. Sumner C. Roberts, a professional photographer who
has been shooting professionally since 1980. He has photographed over
800 weddings and other life events, as well as doing studio photography.
He has written articles for numerous magazines on the subject of how to
select a digital camera. Dr. Digital lives in Zephyrhills (like the
water), Florida."

Yes, that is 'Steven M. Scharf'. Would you buy anything from this man?
Click on his affiliate links? Believe anything he posts?

PS - I am happy to be corrected on anything posted above - anyone, Mr
Scharf included, who wishes to offer verifiable information to the
contrary, is welcome to contact me. I'll very happily apologise if any
of it is incorrect or misquoted. Needless to say, I have cached copies
just in case any webpages are altered to protect the guilty, as he has
already proven he will do. (O:

PPS - The trail on Mr Scharf goes MUCH further than shown above. I'm
being kind by stopping here.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 6:23 am
From: tony cooper

On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:41:31 +1000, Mark Thomas
<markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com> wrote:

>SMS gloated:
>> OMG, how did my humble site become the #1 Google rated site!
>
>Read on... My apologies for this off-topic crosspost, but just to cover
>all the groups SMS is polluting... here are a few repeated notes for
>search engines and anyone tempted to take SMS too seriously, or visit
>his famous, highly accoladed websites..
>
>A quick look around shows the following facts - if you can be bothered
>reading it, make your own judgment about this person, his real level of
> experience, and his morals.

Scharf may come across as a bit strange, but the obsessive stalking
shown in your post comes across as just as strange. I can't imagine
doing that much research on someone whose postings don't affect you
and can be skipped with a single keystroke.

I live within an hour and half's drive of Zephyrhills. For a suitable
fee, I'll drive over there research whether or not "Dr Roberts"
exists. The fee would be minimal; gas money, at most. I'm sure I'd
enjoy the outing because of the photo opportunities along the way.

I'd make it a day-trip and takes some shots from Bok Tower, try for
some character shots of strawberry field migrant workers, and take
some shots of the antique airplanes at "The Fantasy of Flight"
attraction.

I may not add to your voluminous data base on Scharf, but you seem to
be interested in the slightest details.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 14 2008 6:47 am
From: SMS

tony cooper wrote:

> Scharf may come across as a bit strange, but the obsessive stalking
> shown in your post comes across as just as strange.

I'm flattered that he spends so much time reading about me, but he's not
my type, LOL. It's not easy having web sites in the top rated spots;
there's always someone jealous and upset about it.

When you use "I'm Feeling Lucky" on Google and the site that comes up is
a non-commercial, informative site, it means that thousands of others
value informative unbiased sites over commercial sites that are trying
to sell them something.

"Bicycle Lighting" > I'm Feeling Lucky
"Bicycle Coffee" > I'm Feeling Lucky
"NiMH versus Li-Ion" > I'm Feeling Lucky
"Adding Cages" > I'm Feeling Lucky

I have a few sites that are only #2 or #3 in the ratings, but we're
working on those!

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

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.photo.digital"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.photo.digital+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Friday, November 14, 2008

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 9 topics - digest

0 comments:

Live Traffic

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Friday, November 14, 2008

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 9 topics - digest

0 comments:

Search

Live Traffic