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:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Long lens options
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/484fe667d2c46c51?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 7:31 am
From: Don Stauffer

My wife and I both have zooms that go out to 300mm, but occasionally
we'd like a longer option. I don't want to spend a lot of money, 'cause
we wouldn't use it that often.

Which do folks think would have better performance- a 2X converter, or
one of those 600mm "mirror" lenses?

Does anyone know what optical configuration those mirror lenses are- are
they Cassegrains, or Newtonians (flat folding lens), or something
entirely different?

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 8:16 am
From: M-M

In article <49a80743$0$87068$815e3792@news.qwest.net>,
Don Stauffer <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote:

> My wife and I both have zooms that go out to 300mm, but occasionally
> we'd like a longer option. I don't want to spend a lot of money, 'cause
> we wouldn't use it that often.
>
> Which do folks think would have better performance- a 2X converter, or
> one of those 600mm "mirror" lenses?
>
> Does anyone know what optical configuration those mirror lenses are- are
> they Cassegrains, or Newtonians (flat folding lens), or something
> entirely different?

I think you'd be better off with a spotting scope than a mirror lens.
The aperture will be about the same but the bokeh on a mirror lens is
horrific.

--
m-m
http://www.mhmyers.com

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 11:46 am
From: "DD-Diver"

"M-M" <nospam.m-m@ny.more> schreef in bericht
news:nospam.m-m-9837C1.11165427022009@cpe-76-190-186-198.neo.res.rr.com...
> In article <49a80743$0$87068$815e3792@news.qwest.net>,
> Don Stauffer <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote:
>
>> My wife and I both have zooms that go out to 300mm, but occasionally
>> we'd like a longer option. I don't want to spend a lot of money, 'cause
>> we wouldn't use it that often.
>>
>> Which do folks think would have better performance- a 2X converter, or
>> one of those 600mm "mirror" lenses?
>>
>> Does anyone know what optical configuration those mirror lenses are- are
>> they Cassegrains, or Newtonians (flat folding lens), or something
>> entirely different?
>
>
> I think you'd be better off with a spotting scope than a mirror lens.
> The aperture will be about the same but the bokeh on a mirror lens is
> horrific.
>
> --
> m-m
> http://www.mhmyers.com

For one, the "bokeh" is horrific, for me, it was exactly that donut-shape of
unsharp spots that made buy one (Sigma 600), it gives great creative
possibilities.

OP: "mirrors" are catadioptric,see also:
http://photo.net/learn/optics/mirrors/ ...article dates from 2003.

"mirrors" are manual focus only, and have a fixed aparture. Decades ago
Pentax made a 400-600 mirror zoom.., actually, there is one on E-Bay right
now. I would love to have something like that for my Canon!

If your current setup is compatible with a 2x-converter, I would try that
option first, probably a lot cheaper, and you can aways sell the converter
later.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Reading on paper vs "screening" online and "screening" on a Kindle
Screener
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/eee1f550dcc6ae4a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 7:33 am
From: Don Stauffer

I do NOT share your concern. To me the term reading does not limit the
medium. I read writing on billboards, movie screens, CRTs, or whatever.

I never could see why keyboarding was not typing :-(

danbloom wrote:
> Reading on paper vs "screening" online and "screening" on a Kindle
> Screener
>
> I am curious to know if any other people here share my concerns about
> the need for a new word in English, and other languages, too, for
> READING ONLINE, to differentiate this activity from reading on paper,
> which is a very different animal.
>
> See two blogs I am on here: one in China, the other in USA:
>
> http://zippy1300.blogspot.com
>
> http://www.36pr.com/2009/02/27/6-on-36-qa-with-taiwan-based-reporter-dan-bloom-on-screening/
>
> AND in other languages, how does one different reading text on paper
> surface to reading text on a screen online? Do tell.
>
> Email me offline for any followups too.
>
> danbloom AT gmail DOT com

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 8:26 am
From: Spamm Trappe

On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 05:23:05 -0800 (PST), danbloom wrote:
>
> I am curious to know if any other people here share my concerns about
> the need for a new word in English, and other languages, too, for
> READING ONLINE,

sigh... Another frickin' google groper.

I am curious *why you think this is On Topic in rec.photo.digital* !!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Abercrombie and Fitch Women Jeans & Pants - discount
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/effb3f349b2ccee1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 7:51 am
From: sxhhuangshuixian@gmail.com

Where can go to find Abercrombie and Fitch Women Jeans & Pants?
now We have a good collection of Abercrombie and Fitch Women Jeans &
Pants in different styles and different colors.

Please see them :
http://www.luxury-fashion.org/static/Apparels/Abercrombie-and-Fitch-Women-Pants-23.html
http://www.luxury-fashion.org/static/Apparels/Abercrombie-and-Fitch-Women-Pants-24.html

Our Abercrombie and Fitch Women Jeans & Pants are fine quality
And find more new fashion cloth,shoes and apparels please view :
http://www.luxury-fashion.org

Welcome check our other pages or feel free contact us.
You can find what do you want here!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Your Favorite Photo Posting Sites? (Nope. Not Trolling.)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/d6529156025c7f2f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 8:26 am
From: ray

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:35:27 -0800, Twibil wrote:

> I understand that there are both free and pay sites, but I've yet to
> find a breakdown anywhere that compares services offered, user
> friendliness, bang for your buck (in the case of the pay sites),
> etcetera.
>
> So with some trepidation, and no little antici..................pation,
> I await your concensus.
>
> What sites do you personally use and recommend, and why?
>
> (Bear in mind that I can boot up a computer -and not a lot more.) ~Pete

I prefer my own personal web site where I can do what I want for a fixed
fee - $5/month with netfirms.

== 2 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 8:43 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <70qigtF8opnpU24@mid.individual.net>, ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:35:27 -0800, Twibil wrote:
>
>> I understand that there are both free and pay sites, but I've yet to
>> find a breakdown anywhere that compares services offered, user
>> friendliness, bang for your buck (in the case of the pay sites),
>> etcetera.
>>
>> So with some trepidation, and no little antici..................pation,
>> I await your concensus.
>>
>> What sites do you personally use and recommend, and why?
>>
>> (Bear in mind that I can boot up a computer -and not a lot more.) ~Pete
>
>I prefer my own personal web site where I can do what I want for a fixed
>fee - $5/month with netfirms.

I keep seeing an old website, I guess free, that has not been shut off since the owner died
on netfirms.

Well last I looked I have at least 300GB storage on my Ipower website.
If you pay on a 2 year basis, its about $6 mo.

What does Comcast give you, I have not figured that out because I have not investigated.
Its rare to see web pages on Comcast webspace. I know they took away USENET.
Its free. I see 1 GB from some source, but I have not been able to do anything
yeat after enabling Comcast webspace.

I mostly use ACDSee to generate thumnailed picture viewing.

greg

== 3 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 8:45 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <go9583$i77$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote:
>In article <70qigtF8opnpU24@mid.individual.net>, ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:35:27 -0800, Twibil wrote:
>>
>>> I understand that there are both free and pay sites, but I've yet to
>>> find a breakdown anywhere that compares services offered, user
>>> friendliness, bang for your buck (in the case of the pay sites),
>>> etcetera.
>>>
>>> So with some trepidation, and no little antici..................pation,
>>> I await your concensus.
>>>
>>> What sites do you personally use and recommend, and why?
>>>
>>> (Bear in mind that I can boot up a computer -and not a lot more.) ~Pete
>>
>>I prefer my own personal web site where I can do what I want for a fixed
>>fee - $5/month with netfirms.
>
>I keep seeing an old website, I guess free, that has not been shut off since
> the owner died
>on netfirms.
>
>Well last I looked I have at least 300GB storage on my Ipower website.
>If you pay on a 2 year basis, its about $6 mo.
>
>What does Comcast give you, I have not figured that out because I have not
> investigated.
>Its rare to see web pages on Comcast webspace. I know they took away USENET.
>Its free. I see 1 GB from some source, but I have not been able to do anything
>yeat after enabling Comcast webspace.
>
>I mostly use ACDSee to generate thumnailed picture viewing.
>

If you use your own site, you can make thumails any size and pictures any size.

greg

== 4 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 9:08 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <go95ac$i77$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote:
>In article <go9583$i77$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
> (GregS) wrote:
>>In article <70qigtF8opnpU24@mid.individual.net>, ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:35:27 -0800, Twibil wrote:
>>>
>>>> I understand that there are both free and pay sites, but I've yet to
>>>> find a breakdown anywhere that compares services offered, user
>>>> friendliness, bang for your buck (in the case of the pay sites),
>>>> etcetera.
>>>>
>>>> So with some trepidation, and no little antici..................pation,
>>>> I await your concensus.
>>>>
>>>> What sites do you personally use and recommend, and why?
>>>>
>>>> (Bear in mind that I can boot up a computer -and not a lot more.) ~Pete
>>>
>>>I prefer my own personal web site where I can do what I want for a fixed
>>>fee - $5/month with netfirms.
>>
>>I keep seeing an old website, I guess free, that has not been shut off since
>> the owner died
>>on netfirms.
>>
>>Well last I looked I have at least 300GB storage on my Ipower website.
>>If you pay on a 2 year basis, its about $6 mo.
>>
>>What does Comcast give you, I have not figured that out because I have not
>> investigated.
>>Its rare to see web pages on Comcast webspace. I know they took away USENET.
>>Its free. I see 1 GB from some source, but I have not been able to do anything
>>yeat after enabling Comcast webspace.
>>
>>I mostly use ACDSee to generate thumnailed picture viewing.
>>
>
>If you use your own site, you can make thumails any size and pictures any size.
>

Most all web providers provide free web space. I took a few moments and
set up my FREE Comcast space.

Here is what I set up.

https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/page_01.htm

greg

== 5 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 9:33 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <go96ls$ins$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote:
>In article <go95ac$i77$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
> (GregS) wrote:
>>In article <go9583$i77$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>In article <70qigtF8opnpU24@mid.individual.net>, ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:
>>>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:35:27 -0800, Twibil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I understand that there are both free and pay sites, but I've yet to
>>>>> find a breakdown anywhere that compares services offered, user
>>>>> friendliness, bang for your buck (in the case of the pay sites),
>>>>> etcetera.
>>>>>
>>>>> So with some trepidation, and no little antici..................pation,
>>>>> I await your concensus.
>>>>>
>>>>> What sites do you personally use and recommend, and why?
>>>>>
>>>>> (Bear in mind that I can boot up a computer -and not a lot more.) ~Pete
>>>>
>>>>I prefer my own personal web site where I can do what I want for a fixed
>>>>fee - $5/month with netfirms.
>>>
>>>I keep seeing an old website, I guess free, that has not been shut off since
>>> the owner died
>>>on netfirms.
>>>
>>>Well last I looked I have at least 300GB storage on my Ipower website.
>>>If you pay on a 2 year basis, its about $6 mo.
>>>
>>>What does Comcast give you, I have not figured that out because I have not
>>> investigated.
>>>Its rare to see web pages on Comcast webspace. I know they took away USENET.
>>>Its free. I see 1 GB from some source, but I have not been able to do
> anything
>>>yeat after enabling Comcast webspace.
>>>
>>>I mostly use ACDSee to generate thumnailed picture viewing.
>>>
>>
>>If you use your own site, you can make thumails any size and pictures any
> size.
>>
>
>
>Most all web providers provide free web space. I took a few moments and
>set up my FREE Comcast space.
>
>Here is what I set up.
>
>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/page_01.htm
>

Alternately, my new home page.......

https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/

== 6 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 9:34 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <go9855$j41$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote:
>In article <go96ls$ins$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
> (GregS) wrote:
>>In article <go95ac$i77$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>In article <go9583$i77$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>In article <70qigtF8opnpU24@mid.individual.net>, ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:35:27 -0800, Twibil wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I understand that there are both free and pay sites, but I've yet to
>>>>>> find a breakdown anywhere that compares services offered, user
>>>>>> friendliness, bang for your buck (in the case of the pay sites),
>>>>>> etcetera.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So with some trepidation, and no little antici..................pation,
>>>>>> I await your concensus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What sites do you personally use and recommend, and why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Bear in mind that I can boot up a computer -and not a lot more.) ~Pete
>>>>>
>>>>>I prefer my own personal web site where I can do what I want for a fixed
>>>>>fee - $5/month with netfirms.
>>>>
>>>>I keep seeing an old website, I guess free, that has not been shut off since
>>>> the owner died
>>>>on netfirms.
>>>>
>>>>Well last I looked I have at least 300GB storage on my Ipower website.
>>>>If you pay on a 2 year basis, its about $6 mo.
>>>>
>>>>What does Comcast give you, I have not figured that out because I have not
>>>> investigated.
>>>>Its rare to see web pages on Comcast webspace. I know they took away USENET.
>>>>Its free. I see 1 GB from some source, but I have not been able to do
>> anything
>>>>yeat after enabling Comcast webspace.
>>>>
>>>>I mostly use ACDSee to generate thumnailed picture viewing.
>>>>
>>>
>>>If you use your own site, you can make thumails any size and pictures any
>> size.
>>>
>>
>>
>>Most all web providers provide free web space. I took a few moments and
>>set up my FREE Comcast space.
>>
>>Here is what I set up.
>>
>>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/page_01.htm
>>
>
>Alternately, my new home page.......
>
>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/

It also works without the s https

http://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/

== 7 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 9:39 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <go987d$j41$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote:
>In article <go9855$j41$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
> (GregS) wrote:
>>In article <go96ls$ins$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>In article <go95ac$i77$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>In article <go9583$i77$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>>In article <70qigtF8opnpU24@mid.individual.net>, ray <ray@zianet.com>
> wrote:
>>>>>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:35:27 -0800, Twibil wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I understand that there are both free and pay sites, but I've yet to
>>>>>>> find a breakdown anywhere that compares services offered, user
>>>>>>> friendliness, bang for your buck (in the case of the pay sites),
>>>>>>> etcetera.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So with some trepidation, and no little antici..................pation,
>>>>>>> I await your concensus.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What sites do you personally use and recommend, and why?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Bear in mind that I can boot up a computer -and not a lot more.) ~Pete
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I prefer my own personal web site where I can do what I want for a fixed
>>>>>>fee - $5/month with netfirms.
>>>>>
>>>>>I keep seeing an old website, I guess free, that has not been shut off
> since
>>>>> the owner died
>>>>>on netfirms.
>>>>>
>>>>>Well last I looked I have at least 300GB storage on my Ipower website.
>>>>>If you pay on a 2 year basis, its about $6 mo.
>>>>>
>>>>>What does Comcast give you, I have not figured that out because I have not
>>>>> investigated.
>>>>>Its rare to see web pages on Comcast webspace. I know they took away
> USENET.
>>>>>Its free. I see 1 GB from some source, but I have not been able to do
>>> anything
>>>>>yeat after enabling Comcast webspace.
>>>>>
>>>>>I mostly use ACDSee to generate thumnailed picture viewing.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>If you use your own site, you can make thumails any size and pictures any
>>> size.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Most all web providers provide free web space. I took a few moments and
>>>set up my FREE Comcast space.
>>>
>>>Here is what I set up.
>>>
>>>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/page_01.htm
>>>
>>
>>Alternately, my new home page.......
>>
>>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/
>
>
>It also works without the s https
>
>http://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/

And I now added my pics to my new web page.....

https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/

== 8 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 9:43 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <go98gr$j45$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote:
>In article <go987d$j41$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
> (GregS) wrote:
>>In article <go9855$j41$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>In article <go96ls$ins$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>In article <go95ac$i77$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>>In article <go9583$i77$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>>> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>>>In article <70qigtF8opnpU24@mid.individual.net>, ray <ray@zianet.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:35:27 -0800, Twibil wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I understand that there are both free and pay sites, but I've yet to
>>>>>>>> find a breakdown anywhere that compares services offered, user
>>>>>>>> friendliness, bang for your buck (in the case of the pay sites),
>>>>>>>> etcetera.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So with some trepidation, and no little antici..................pation,
>>>>>>>> I await your concensus.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What sites do you personally use and recommend, and why?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (Bear in mind that I can boot up a computer -and not a lot more.) ~Pete
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I prefer my own personal web site where I can do what I want for a fixed
>>>>>>>fee - $5/month with netfirms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I keep seeing an old website, I guess free, that has not been shut off
>> since
>>>>>> the owner died
>>>>>>on netfirms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well last I looked I have at least 300GB storage on my Ipower website.
>>>>>>If you pay on a 2 year basis, its about $6 mo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What does Comcast give you, I have not figured that out because I have not
>>>>>> investigated.
>>>>>>Its rare to see web pages on Comcast webspace. I know they took away
>> USENET.
>>>>>>Its free. I see 1 GB from some source, but I have not been able to do
>>>> anything
>>>>>>yeat after enabling Comcast webspace.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I mostly use ACDSee to generate thumnailed picture viewing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>If you use your own site, you can make thumails any size and pictures any
>>>> size.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Most all web providers provide free web space. I took a few moments and
>>>>set up my FREE Comcast space.
>>>>
>>>>Here is what I set up.
>>>>
>>>>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/page_01.htm
>>>>
>>>
>>>Alternately, my new home page.......
>>>
>>>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/
>>
>>
>>It also works without the s https
>>
>>http://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/
>
>
>And I now added my pics to my new web page.....
>
>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/
>

Right now my Ipower site seems at least 10 times faster than Comcast.

Both

http://zekfrivolous.com/280z/page_01.htm

https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/

== 9 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 10:25 am
From: ray

On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 17:43:34 +0000, GregS wrote:

> In article <go98gr$j45$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote:
>>In article <go987d$j41$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>>zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>In article <go9855$j41$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>>>zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>In article <go96ls$ins$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>>In article <go95ac$i77$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>>> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>>>In article <go9583$i77$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>>>> zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com
>>>>>> (GregS) wrote:
>>>>>>>In article <70qigtF8opnpU24@mid.individual.net>, ray
>>>>>>><ray@zianet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:35:27 -0800, Twibil wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I understand that there are both free and pay sites, but I've
>>>>>>>>> yet to find a breakdown anywhere that compares services offered,
>>>>>>>>> user friendliness, bang for your buck (in the case of the pay
>>>>>>>>> sites), etcetera.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So with some trepidation, and no little
>>>>>>>>> antici..................pation, I await your concensus.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What sites do you personally use and recommend, and why?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (Bear in mind that I can boot up a computer -and not a lot
>>>>>>>>> more.) ~Pete
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I prefer my own personal web site where I can do what I want for a
>>>>>>>>fixed fee - $5/month with netfirms.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I keep seeing an old website, I guess free, that has not been shut
>>>>>>>off
>>> since
>>>>>>> the owner died
>>>>>>>on netfirms.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Well last I looked I have at least 300GB storage on my Ipower
>>>>>>>website. If you pay on a 2 year basis, its about $6 mo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What does Comcast give you, I have not figured that out because I
>>>>>>>have not
>>>>>>> investigated.
>>>>>>>Its rare to see web pages on Comcast webspace. I know they took
>>>>>>>away
>>> USENET.
>>>>>>>Its free. I see 1 GB from some source, but I have not been able to
>>>>>>>do
>>>>> anything
>>>>>>>yeat after enabling Comcast webspace.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I mostly use ACDSee to generate thumnailed picture viewing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>If you use your own site, you can make thumails any size and
>>>>>>pictures any
>>>>> size.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Most all web providers provide free web space. I took a few moments
>>>>>and set up my FREE Comcast space.
>>>>>
>>>>>Here is what I set up.
>>>>>
>>>>>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/page_01.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Alternately, my new home page.......
>>>>
>>>>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/
>>>
>>>
>>>It also works without the s https
>>>
>>>http://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/
>>
>>
>>And I now added my pics to my new web page.....
>>
>>https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/
>>
>>
> Right now my Ipower site seems at least 10 times faster than Comcast.
>
> Both
>
> http://zekfrivolous.com/280z/page_01.htm
>
> https://home.comcast.net/~zekor/home/

You seem to talk to yourself a lot.

== 10 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 10:56 am
From: Twibil

On Feb 27, 5:57 am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> So you failed the test. Here's a make-up question:

And here's one for you: In 250 words or less, explain exactly what
sort of ignorant twit thinks it's his job to assign homework to other
posters?

You have 30 seconds from............now.

== 11 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 11:59 am
From: tony cooper

On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:56:28 -0800 (PST), Twibil
<nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Feb 27, 5:57 am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> So you failed the test. Here's a make-up question:
>
>And here's one for you: In 250 words or less, explain exactly what
>sort of ignorant twit thinks it's his job to assign homework to other
>posters?
>
>You have 30 seconds from............now.

Is that an assignment?

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

==============================================================================
TOPIC: And on and on it goes...
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/690e5c6701256988?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 8:28 am
From: Dave Cohen

Bob G wrote:
> A terrorist worth his salt would carry a sub-minature camera and take
> all the pictures he wanted unnoticed and with the greatest of ease.
>
> We all remember the legendary Minoxes but I'm sure today's technology
> has produced cameras a fraction of even their minute sizes and capable
> of much better resolution.

Bobby G, the guys that bombed the world trade center the first time were
caught because they returned to the truck rental place to claim their
deposit for the truck that I suppose they were claiming was stolen. Add
to that little piece of trivia those who actually believe they are going
to be sucked up to heaven where 69 virgins will await them (or perhaps
that should be a 69 year old virgin) when they blow themselves up.
Regardless, I find it hard to ascribe to your theory that we are dealing
with the brightest lights on the planet. (Note: I am aware that others
share equally ridiculous beliefs about being sucked up into heaven and
I'll leave it to the reader to figure out what I think of that bunch).
Dave Cohen

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 9:50 am
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-02-26 10:26:07 -0800, "David Ruether" <d_ruether@thotmail.com> said:

>
> "RichA" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a94f975c-d23b-4661-a6cc-2db557c8b1be@m24g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> PDN:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/c4jq2t
>
> Robert Taylor was arrested February 12 after taking this photograph of
> a 2 Train in The Bronx.
> Last week in New York City, a fan of trains was arrested for
> photographing a train. It might be funny if it didn't keep happening.
>
> Robert S. Taylor of Brooklyn was taking photos for fun last Thursday
> in a subway station. Police saw him and cited him for unauthorized
> photography, disorderly conduct/unreasonable voice and impeding
> traffic.
>
> The charge of unauthorized photography – a crime that doesn't exist –
> has already been dropped, Taylor says.
>
> [...]
>
> In 2004, the MTA proposed a ban on photography in the subway,
> justifying it as a way to protect the subway from terrorists. The
> proposal died after an outcry from photographers and the public.
>
> [...]
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> While alone on a raised subway platform near NYC in the
> late '60's, I was struck by the sight of tall, closely-spaced grave
> stones in a nearby graveyard that resembled a view of a large
> city with many tall buildings. I got out my 35mm camera, put
> a 200mm lens on it, and while shooting a few frames, I heard
> footsteps approaching. Almost immediately, I was asked to
> stop taking pictures by a policeman who informed that doing
> what I was doing was illegal. Hmmm, perhaps it was my use
> of a compact tripod to help steady the camera what dunnit...;-)
> --DR

Carry a Photographer's Bust Card. Download it here:

http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 10:21 am
From: "Bent Attorney Esq."

On Feb 27, 6:36 am, Get lost <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 26, 9:21 am, "Daniel" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:a94f975c-d23b-4661-a6cc-2db557c8b1be@m24g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> > PDN:
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/c4jq2t
>
> > Not that I have ever had a problem, but with the recent publicity I've been
> > racking my brains to try and work out why the photography restriction is
> > being so heavily enforced under the terrorism regulations, when Google and
> > Geomapping seem to do what they want. The conclusion I have come to is that
> > there must be a reason for it, so just co-operate, after all it's only a
> > photo. For me, yeah ok, it would up*ss me off, but it's not the end of the
> > world.
>
> > The freedom fighters will get the hump with the above statement, but
> > remember it's only a photo. For those people, I would urge you to consider
> > that it's possible that they may know something that you don't? Who knows?
> > But I can guarantee you that you sure won't.
>
> Stupid sheep like you are the real problem.

That is so correct. This cat uses the term 'freedom fighters' in an
almost derogatory manner. He/she obviously enjoys his/her sheep pen.
I don't.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Did the Canon boat sink?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/b0dfb9b4ed431024?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 8:39 am
From: "David J Taylor"

SMS wrote:
[]
>> And do you really think that the noise between ISO 1000 and ISO 1360
>> (i.e. between f/1.2 and f/1.4) is /that/ noticeable?
>
> Interesting that you're choosing ISO 1000 as a baseline.

I'm sure the same argument would apply between ISO 100 and ISO 136, except
that these are not the sort of ISOs one might need to use if an f/1.2 lens
was needed.

Interesting that you didn't answer my question.

David

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 9:27 am
From: SMS

David J Taylor wrote:
> SMS wrote:
> []
>>> And do you really think that the noise between ISO 1000 and ISO 1360
>>> (i.e. between f/1.2 and f/1.4) is /that/ noticeable?
>>
>> Interesting that you're choosing ISO 1000 as a baseline.
>
> I'm sure the same argument would apply between ISO 100 and ISO 136,
> except that these are not the sort of ISOs one might need to use if an
> f/1.2 lens was needed.
>
> Interesting that you didn't answer my question.
>
> David

Interesting that you had to qualify your statement with "/that/" because
that really makes it a subjective call. Is it noticeable? Definitely. Is
it /that/ noticeable? Depends on the individual.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Suggested name change for P&S's
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/3f27fbfb1f649c26?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 9:31 am
From: "---------------"

That name is already taken, Rich. It is, in fact, yours.

"Rich" <none@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:oaidnQQmVrVI9TvUnZ2dnUVZ_jyWnZ2d@giganews.com...
> PofS.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How to take photos of martyrs?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/adc17b011847ad8d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 10:04 am
From: George Kerby

On 2/27/09 8:29 AM, in article h5ufq4hm4invrgctfgnu78iqohagpedd1v@4ax.com,
"Geo" <hw9j-s5hw@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:

> Garbage troll.
No SHIT?

How'd you figure that out?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Making DVD's
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ec0467440c2ea7bb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 27 2009 12:21 pm
From: Doug Jewell

Matt Ion wrote:
> boothmarcus@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Which application is best for putting JPEG pictures onto DVD, Windowds
>> movie maker or Windows DVD maker.
>>
>> I have tried DVD maker but the finalised DVD will not play on some
>> older DVD players.
>
> What type of discs are you using? Most older players don't like DVD+R.
> And some simply don't like burned discs at all.
>
>> Will Windows movie maker convert the JPEG pics to a true DVD movie
>> that will play on any machine, like a movie you can rent for the
>> night, as these do play on any machine.
>
> I don't think Movie Maker can create DVDs - it will merely put a WMV
> file onto a data disc. That's WHY there's a separate "DVD Maker" program.
>
> As someone else noted, you should be able to simply place the JPEG files
> on a data disc (even a CD-R) and most players will be able to play them
> back in sequence (look for the "JPEG" logo on the front of the player).
Yeah, most DVD players from about the last 5 years (if not
longer) will play a CD filled with JPGs, however there are
often limitations on things like how many photos per folder,
how many folders deep the photos can go, and the size of the
JPGs.

Unfortunately these limitations are generally not well
documented in the user manual, so are pretty much determined
by trial and error.

Also, my last 3 DVD players (a samsung, pioneer, and some
chinese p.o.s.) would only play JPGs if they were on a CDR.
If they were on a DVD+/-R they wouldn't recognise them, as
they expected disks on a DVD disk to be in video format.
Likewise all 3 players would play a CDR of MP3 files, but
not a DVD of MP3s.

As to the OP's question about Windows Movie Maker, the
combination of Windows Movie Maker + Windows DVD Maker on
Vista will produce a DVD-Video format slideshow that is
playable on most DVD players. Unfortunately though, a lot of
older DVD players don't like DVD+R disks, some don't like
DVD-R disks, and some don't like recorded disks at all. Only
solution for this problem unfortunately is to put the DVD
player in landfill and replace it with a new unit.

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

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