Photoshop How To Use: rec.photo.digital - 26 new messages in 14 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 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 1 2009 11:36 pm
From: Bob Williams

Paul Furman wrote:
> Bob Williams wrote:
>> trevor thomas [the P&S troll] wrote:
>>> Bob Williams wrote:
>>>> Don Stauffer 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?
>>>>
>>>> Don, I bought a 500mm, f8.0 Vivitar Mirror lens for my Canon A-1
>>>> film camera and was very disappointed in the results.
>>>> Mirror lenses have only one f-stop (f8.0 in this case).
>>>> At f8.0 it is VERY difficult to focus accurately even in bright
>>>> sunlite.
>>>> At low light levels it was almost impossible to focus accurately.
>>>> My canon A-1 has a split image focusing aid. At f8.0, one side of
>>>> the aid tends to go black as you try to focus.
>
> There have been improvements in the 3rd party replacement screens, they
> black out much slower. The limitation becomes the overall dark screen in
> anything less that bright daylight.
> http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/page--Katz-Eye-Plus--plus.html

That is an interesting article.
Kind of shoots down Trevor's thesis doesn't it?
Wish I had the Katz-Eye 6 years ago when I bought the mirror lens.
But now, my prized Canon A-1 Film Camera is a modern anachronism.

>>> That's not caused by the size of the aperture but the focal-length of
>>> the
>>> lens and the angle of the light-rays hitting the focusing screen.
>>>
>>> As example, special focusing screens for the Olympus line of SLR cameras
>>> were designed with specific optical applications in mind. I particularly
>>> like my 100% clear one with the shorter focal-length fresnel lens for
>>> microscopy and astrophotography purposes. It provides for an
>>> ultra-bright
>>> display with little to no light loss for those applications,
>>> independent of
>>> whatever focal-length is providing the image.
>
> That would show a lot more DOF than the final photo.
> http://brashear.phys.appstate.edu/lhawkins/photo/om-screens.shtml
> "Focus by microprism only. Clear screen does not show good or bad focus."
>
>
>>> There was a whole line of
>>> specialty focusing screens for Olympus SLR cameras at one point (and may
>>> still be). Ones for wide-angle lenses, telephoto lenses, microscopy
>>> applications, etc. Olympus was bright enough to know that you had to
>>> match
>>> the focusing screen to the optics used for imaging. The darkening
>>> that you
>>> see is due to the angle of the imaging light-path and the way it is
>>> entering the focus-assist prism surface, not the light intensity. It
>>> would
>>> still be dark on one limb of that focusing area even if you were
>>> pointing
>>> it at the sun. This is also due to the micro-fresnel lens' focal-length
>>> mounted to the surface of your focusing screen. It can't focus on the
>>> main
>>> lens' virtual image light-path as presented by the longer focal-length
>>> lenses.
>>>
>>> This is why fixed focusing screens in SLR-like cameras designed to
>>> accept a
>>> wide array of optical components is just plain foolish. Those who buy
>>> cameras with fixed focusing screens, never realizing they have to be
>>> matched with the lenses in use, are even more foolish. Not only does the
>>> lens' focal-length change the camera's exposure metering accuracy but so
>>> too the ability to focus. Unless the focusing screen is matched to the
>>> right focal length lens your exposure and focusing will always be a
>>> crap-shot.
>>>
>>> There's a lot of foolish camera buyers out there who don't know the
>>> first
>>> thing about the principles of optics and how their cameras work. They
>>> buy
>>> what they are told to buy, by those even less informed and less
>>> educated,
>>> never knowing the difference. Nor do they comprehend why their exposures
>>> are always off and then have to depend on RAW image formats to try to
>>> fix
>>> what their lousy one-optical-path-fits-all optics created in the first
>>> place.
>>>
>> What you say is probably right,
>
> I would not assume that coming from the P&S troll.
>
>
>> but before I got the mirror lens, I used a 400 mm f4.5 tele lens
>> (refractor) and never had any kind of focusing problem with it.
>> Focusing was done "Wide Open" and everything worked normally. I was
>> semi-pissed that neither Canon nor Vivitar pointed out this problem
>> with a 500 mm Mirror lens. My Vivitar lens now just sits on a closet
>> shelf, unused.
>>
>> I guess it's just as well because I now use my Panasonic Lumix FZ-15
>> with f 2.8 Image Stabilized 36-432mm (Equiv. F.L.) lens for
>> everything. The camera does all the focusing and gets it spot on every
>> time.
>
> You lose high ISO performance though.
That is true.
However, for me, that is not a serious problem.
I do most of my work outdoors and f 2.8 (even at 432mm!!)is a big help.
Indoor shots is where I wished the Panny had better high ISO
performance. Flash, of course, often helps but there is nothing like
ambient light for capturing the true "mood" of the moment.
But Hey! You have to accept trade offs somewhere.
Bob Wiliams

It's worth noting that 300mm on a
> DX SLR is 450mm equivalent, so the OP is already there with his current
> lens.
>
>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Just Some Pictures
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/eb8b8316d35df58a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 12:46 am
From: John O'Flaherty

On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 19:50:31 +0100, "Thea Plus"
<info@plusvertalingen.notthis.com> wrote:

>
>"Focus" <dont@mail.me> wrote in message
>news:h5SdnQ0sRcVQ5TfUnZ2dnUVZ8hULAAAA@novis.pt...
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/JSP/
>>
>> --
>> ----
>> Focus
>>
>
>I really like the first one.

Me too. Another picture that has a lot going on, all tied together.
--
John

==============================================================================
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 3 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 12:52 am
From: Ron Hunter

David J Taylor wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
> []
>> Maybe schools should become interested in it as a way to buy
>> textbooks, and reduce the outrageous load our children cart around in
>> the backpacks these days....
>
> Feel lucky the school-children can read. Many here cannot, despite
> schooling, and probably even more cannot do simple maths. As for
> operating a camera correctly....
>
> David
>
I didn't say they could read, only that they had to carry around a
back-breaking load of books. I am a substitute teacher, mainly 5th and
6th grades, and the load some of these kids come to school with would
break down a camel, or pack mule.

It seems to me that issuing a CD for use at home would cover the need
for a printed book for most of them, and would save a LOT of trees, and
reduce cost for the schools.
A Kindle wouldn't really serve the need at this time, but the idea of a
general purpose reader certainly has merit.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 12:56 am
From: Ron Hunter

ASAAR wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 02:58:24 -0600, Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>>> The readers can also act as mp3 players (at increased battery
>>> usage) and photo viewers, albeit with poor image quality and no
>>> color, for now at least.
>> When it can offer color, and a lower price, I might be interested, but
>> not at this point. I waited from 1967 to 1981 for computers to reach my
>> specifications for buying one, so I am quite patient.
>>
>> Maybe schools should become interested in it as a way to buy textbooks,
>> and reduce the outrageous load our children cart around in the backpacks
>> these days....
>
> That's the best use I've heard for them so far. The only problem
> is how to justify allowing a semester's worth of books that can fit
> on a chip, that takes only minutes to download and charging the
> credit card $500 to $1,000 for the lot. For textbook publishers and
> their cronies in colleges and school boards to accept this there'll
> have to be a lot of arm twisting. Or perhaps neck wringing. :)
>
>
Textbooks are, and always have been, a massive boondoggle. Many times
they are updated only to increase profits, poorly edited for accuracy,
and often written to promote a political agenda, rather than to
accurately report the facts. History books are probably the worst, but
even math books often promote agendas by their example problems, and
their approach to teaching the subject.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 1:47 am
From: "David J Taylor"

Ron Hunter wrote:
[]
> I didn't say they could read, only that they had to carry around a
> back-breaking load of books.

Touché!

> I am a substitute teacher, mainly 5th
> and 6th grades, and the load some of these kids come to school with
> would break down a camel, or pack mule.

I don't know your system - what age range?
I don't remember this as an issue at all back in the 1960s UK education.

I wonder whether there is far /too/ much information being crammed into
these pupils, rather than concentrating on the basics and teaching them
how to learn for themselves?

> It seems to me that issuing a CD for use at home would cover the need
> for a printed book for most of them, and would save a LOT of trees,
> and reduce cost for the schools.

.. and perhaps make it a slightly more attractive way to read the content,
not to mention search ability.

> A Kindle wouldn't really serve the need at this time, but the idea of
> a general purpose reader certainly has merit.

.. or, put the books up on the Web with password-controlled access?

When I went on my recent Major Trip - I took PDFs of all the manuals I
needed on the portable PC. Actually looked at two of them (the Nikon D60
and the radio scanner)! Convenient in the cabin, and no extra weight or
space, but not as nice as glancing at them on deck in the sunshine or
snow-shower!

Cheers,
David

==============================================================================
TOPIC: discount Air max tn shoes
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a49478447f20c45c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 12:57 am
From: sneaker

discount Air max 95 shoes www.sneaker-shop08.com
wholesale Air Max 87 shoes
discount Air MAX LTD shoes
sell Air max 90 shoes
discount Air Max 88 shoes www.sneaker-shop08.com
discount Air MAX 89 shoes
discount Air max tn shoes
discount Air Max tn8 shoes
discount Air MAX tn9 shoes www.sneaker-shop08.com
discount MEN'S WOMEN'S Shox R5 R4 trainers
discount Men's women's shocks OZ NZ TL trainers
For more products pls visit: www.sneaker-shop08.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: cheap children jeans wholesale
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/d43ba9b1151829ac?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 12:58 am
From: sneaker

jeans:
cheap EVISU jeans wholesale www.sneaker-shop08.com
cheap ED hardy jeans wholesale
cheap COOGI jeans wholesale www.sneaker-shop08.com
cheap GINO GREEN GLOBAL jeans wholesale
cheap LACOSTE jeans wholesale
cheap G-STAR jeans wholesale
cheap KED ROBOT jeans wholesale
cheap RED MONKEY jeans wholesale
cheap ADIDAS jeans wholesale
cheap BBC jeans wholesale www.sneaker-shop08.com
cheap BOSS jeans wholesale
cheap LRG jeans wholesale www.sneaker-shop08.com
cheap HELEN jeans wholesale
cheap JUICY jeans wholesale
cheap THE CROUN HOLDER jeans wholesale
cheap SMET jeans wholesale
cheap SEVEN jeans wholesale www.sneaker-shop08.com
cheap TRUN NORTH FACE jeans wholesale
cheap children jeans wholesale
cheap ARMANI jeans wholesale www.sneaker-shop08.com
cheap BAPE jeans wholesale
cheap LEVIS jeans wholesale
cheap ANTIK jeans wholesale www.sneaker-shop08.com
cheap true religion jeans wholesale

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Hogan shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/b196b1b83dac92c6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 12:58 am
From: sneaker

Footwear (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Paul Smith shoes
Jordan shoes
Bape shoes
Chanel shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
D&G shoes
Dior shoes
ED hardy shoes
Evisu shoes
Fendi shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Gucci shoes `
Hogan shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Lv shoes
Prada shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Timberland shoes
Tous shoes
Ugg shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Ice cream shoes
Sebago shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Lacoste shoes
Air force one shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
TODS shoes
AF shoes

Footwear (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Paul Smith shoes
Jordan shoes
Bape shoes
Chanel shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
D&G shoes
Dior shoes
ED hardy shoes
Evisu shoes
Fendi shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Gucci shoes
Hogan shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Lv shoes
Prada shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Timberland shoes
Tous shoes
Ugg shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Ice cream shoes
Sebago shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )
Lacoste shoes
Air force one shoes (paypal payment)( www.sneaker-shop08.com )

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why is my flash not the same as daylight
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/226e84a509f42011?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 1:26 am
From: "Ioannis"

john wrote:
> My compact digital camera has a tiny flash. I notice that colours
> taken by the flash do not look exactly the like as same colours taken
> in bright daylight.
>
> That's strange because years ago I had learnt (perhaps simplisticlly)
> that the two light sources were the almost exactly same.
>
> I'm now questioning if the colour settings on a digital camera for
> flash and bright daylight are actually the same thing.
>
> Any info on this please.

Small Wattages or relatively low levels of illumination with various sources, in
my opinion tend to introduce color distortion.

To achieve a truer color rendering close to the one specified by the source
used, fairly high illumination levels are necessary.

A small (say 10 - 20W) "daylight" fluorescent, for example, will usually distort
colors and will not produce a true "daylight" illumination, unless some fairly
high illumination levels (at least 1,000 - 1,500 lux) are used.

My Nikon 2200 Coolpix has the same problem, too. I usually have to adjust the
contrast and color levels in Photoshop after I take a picture, otherwise the
picture is too gloomy :-)

> J
--
Ioannis --- "There's _always_ a mistake, somewhere".

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 6:43 am
From: Don Stauffer

The idea of a color temperature is primarily aimed at the light from a
thermal (broadband) source, that is, blackbody continuous emission
across the spectrum, rather than one or more individual spectral lines.
While the use of several judiciously picked spectral lines can
approximate a black body, there are not an infinite number of gases and
lines, so picking the right gases for a flash tube is a great art.
Flash tubes TRY to duplicate sunlight, but it is VERY, VERY hard to do
with line emission.

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 7:57 am
From: "Sam"

"john" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9BC2260661341451E7A@194.177.98.144...
> My compact digital camera has a tiny flash. I notice that colours
> taken by the flash do not look exactly the like as same colours taken
> in bright daylight.
>
> That's strange because years ago I had learnt (perhaps simplisticlly)
> that the two light sources were the almost exactly same.
>
> I'm now questioning if the colour settings on a digital camera for
> flash and bright daylight are actually the same thing.
>
> Any info on this please.

My understanding of daylight is that it's colour varies according to
environmental conditions. So it's impossible to have a flash calibrated to
match it, as it changes too much.
Of course, it's entirely possible that my understanding is flawed.

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 9:08 am
From: The Royal Spam

>
> "john" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9BC2260661341451E7A@194.177.98.144...
>> My compact digital camera has a tiny flash. I notice that colours
>> taken by the flash do not look exactly the like as same colours taken
>> in bright daylight.
>>
>> That's strange because years ago I had learnt (perhaps simplisticlly)
>> that the two light sources were the almost exactly same.
>>
>> I'm now questioning if the colour settings on a digital camera for
>> flash and bright daylight are actually the same thing.
>>
>> Any info on this please.
>
> My understanding of daylight is that it's colour varies according to
> environmental conditions. So it's impossible to have a flash calibrated to
> match it, as it changes too much.
> Of course, it's entirely possible that my understanding is flawed.
>
>

I was told by a lab technician that daylight balanced film was balanced for
June 21st in Washington D.C. at noon.

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 9:50 am
From: "Sam"

"The Royal Spam" <spamalot@dontspamme.com> wrote in message
news:C5D1C2FA.15374%spamalot@dontspamme.com...
>
>
>>
>> "john" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9BC2260661341451E7A@194.177.98.144...
>>> My compact digital camera has a tiny flash. I notice that colours
>>> taken by the flash do not look exactly the like as same colours taken
>>> in bright daylight.
>>>
>>> That's strange because years ago I had learnt (perhaps simplisticlly)
>>> that the two light sources were the almost exactly same.
>>>
>>> I'm now questioning if the colour settings on a digital camera for
>>> flash and bright daylight are actually the same thing.
>>>
>>> Any info on this please.
>>
>> My understanding of daylight is that it's colour varies according to
>> environmental conditions. So it's impossible to have a flash calibrated
>> to
>> match it, as it changes too much.
>> Of course, it's entirely possible that my understanding is flawed.
>>
>>
>
>
> I was told by a lab technician that daylight balanced film was balanced
> for
> June 21st in Washington D.C. at noon.
>

I actually sprayed my coffee when I read that.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: printing for panorama stitched photos
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/abfa6a477328704b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 1:43 am
From: bugbear

ps56k wrote:
> I have a panorama photo shot stitched together from a recent swim meet and
> it looks neat.
> It's about 5500 x 1164 - which looks to be 28" x 6" or ....
>
> SO - where or how can I get this jpeg printed - options ?
>

The only way I've found is to stack multiple
panoramas on top of each other, bringing the
overall aspect ratio back in to something more usual,
then having a poster size print made (e.g. 30" x 20"),
then cutting the separate panos out.

BugBear

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 8:19 am
From: ray

On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:54:28 +1100, Pete D wrote:

> "ray" <ray@zianet.com> wrote in message
> news:710imaF8opnpU48@mid.individual.net...
>> On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 15:07:24 -0600, ps56k wrote:
>>
>>> I have a panorama photo shot stitched together from a recent swim meet
>>> and it looks neat.
>>> It's about 5500 x 1164 - which looks to be 28" x 6" or ....
>>>
>>> SO - where or how can I get this jpeg printed - options ?
>>
>> FWIW - I believe there are some Epson photo printers capable of
>> handling roll paper out to about 30 feet.
>
> Most Canon printers will handle long paper as long as it is no wider
> than A4, I cut A3 to A4 length and just tell the printer via a "custom"
> size.
>
> Pete

You could be right. I wouldn't know since I don't buy canon. My personal
response to their total and legendary lack of support for Linux.

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

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 4:34 am
From: "whisky-dave"

"Daniel" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:mbudnTn_xY7ExzTUnZ2dnUVZ8tbinZ2d@pipex.net...
> "Bent Attorney Esq." <parkstreetbooboo@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6549853e-912b-40ce-8330-89690d9d750a@w35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> 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.
>
>
>
> Well, that went down well.
>
> Sheep? On the contrary, but sometimes communication skills are more
> important than your equipment.

yeah, threats, violence, blackmail, terrorism and sexual favours all work
well too.

>
>
>
>

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 8:20 am
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-02-28 08:14:26 -0800, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> said:

> In message
> <2009022709501216807-christophercampbellremovethis@hotmailcom>, C J
> Campbell
>> Carry a Photographer's Bust Card. Download it here:
>>
>> http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
>>
> Better still an Artistic License... (this one is way ahead of it's time)
>
> http://evolution-control.com/license/

Meh. I want press credentials from The Onion.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 8:43 am
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-02-28 08:00:37 -0800, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> said:

> In message <49a77b7b$0$36380$c30e37c6@pit-reader.telstra.net>, Paul
> Bartram <paul.bartram@AT.OR.invalid> writes
>> [Cross posting deleted]
>>
>>> "George Kerby" <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote
>>
>>> Excellent observation. Thank you!
>>
>> I'll second that.
>>
>> I know when I go, my photography - poor as it is - will be my only memorial.
>> Already some of my earlier shots are taking on historic significance, purely
>> because they are of things and people now gone. As time goes on, everybody's
>> shots will have cultural value to someone.
>>
>> I object strongly to some untrained dweeb in a K-Mart suit telling me what I
>> can and cannot photograph in a public place!
>
> I think in this case the railway station is not a public place... It
> is a private place that the owners let the public use as long as they
> obey a whole load of rules... See conditions of travel attached to
> your ticket (available on request :-)
>
> However paranoia and fear are the main drivers in this case... he could
> be a terrorist..... (without access to google maps, all the publicly
> available pictures and plans and who can not remember what he sees on a
> route he can travel on as often as he buys a ticket. )

I think you have confused the difference between "public place" and
"publicly owned." A public place is any place that is open to the
public -- anyplace where you have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
A railroad station is a public place, privately owned or not (and most
are not). A restaurant is a public place, as is a shopping mall, bar,
museum, casino, etc.

Photography in some public places may be restricted by the owner,
whether the owner is a government or private entity. However, police
and security people may not claim that photography is restricted when
in fact it is not. If push comes to shove, police and others who
wrongly try to keep you from photography where it is not specifically
prohibited can be prosecuted. No one can order you to not take pictures
of children in a park, for example, even if that park is privately
owned. People who threaten to call the police, try to confiscate your
camera or film, or who use threats or intimidation in any way to try to
stop you are violating the law and could be prosecuted. They could also
be sued.

We need to stand up for our rights as photographers and insist on them
being enforced, or we will lose them.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

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

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 4:53 am
From: "bowser"

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:V0Gpl.8231$%54.1888@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
> David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> With today's digital sensors having such high ISO ratings, I think that
>> the need for such lenses is likely to be vanishingly near to zero.
>
> It's still always advantageous to use the lowest ISO setting possible.
>
>> I find that both manufacturers produce similar-priced and similar-quality
>> lenses. Of course, you will always find exceptions.
>
> I haven't compared all the lenses of course, but I have experience with
> some. I.e. compare the extreme wide-angle Canon 10-22 EF-s with the Nikon
> 12-24mm f/4G ED. On Amazon, the Canon is $710, the Nikon is $925 (I paid
> about $610 for my 10-22 EF-s when Dell had a sale).
>
> As Ken Rockwell writes about the Canon 10-22, "This is a great lens. It's
> so great it makes me want to swap over to Canon from Nikon, because it's
> better than my favorite Nikon 12 - 24 mm lens. It's better because it has
> less distortion and costs less."

You just lost me. Anyone who quotes KR will always lose me. Ken's a moron.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 6:35 am
From: SMS

bowser wrote:
>
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message

>> As Ken Rockwell writes about the Canon 10-22, "This is a great lens.
>> It's so great it makes me want to swap over to Canon from Nikon,
>> because it's better than my favorite Nikon 12 - 24 mm lens. It's
>> better because it has less distortion and costs less."
>
> You just lost me. Anyone who quotes KR will always lose me. Ken's a moron.

Ken is extremely biased towards Nikon, and yes it's true that he
sometimes makes moronic statements in that regard. He swore there would
be no D70s (not D70 plural, but the s revision). He insisted that Nikon
would never go to full frame, but that was because he was so upset that
Canon was gaining so many converts from Nikon with their full frame
models. For him to ever say anything positive about Canon is astounding,
and it would have to be regarding something where it's incontrovertible.

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

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 6:00 am
From: tony cooper

On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 22:54:19 -0800 (PST), Twibil <nowayjose6@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Feb 27, 11:59 am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:56:28 -0800 (PST), Twibil
>>
>> <nowayjo...@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?
>
>Sure.
>
>And having failed the test, you've learned something.

Yes, I learned that you haven't discovered Google and self-help.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How to take photos of man-eating sharks?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6e82a79338961560?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 8:42 am
From: whack-a-troll@127.0.0.1

In article <go83en$udr$1@news.motzarella.org>,
mianileng <mianileng@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>Justin C wrote:
>> In article <Xns9BBD8EC968C4FVeebleFetzer@216.250.184.7>, Bert
>> Hyman
>> wrote:
>>> In news:go47ku$a98$1@aioe.org "Xenon" <Xenon@Xenon.Xenon>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> NNTP-Posting-Host: pjEh52yqjTyjuI177+nVig.user.aioe.org
>>>
>>> Oh well.
>>
>> Argon, Xenon? Looks like time to KF the noble gasses.
>>
>
>This guy's also doing the same thing in other NGs. I've just been
>to sci.electronics.design and he asked "How to design an anal
>probe for my ass?"

Yep. He used to be known as the Anagram Troll because his nyms were always
anagrams of (in)famous people's names. Guess he just got tired of all the
work. Please don't pollute his trophy newsgroup with replies too.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How to take photos of killer bees?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/29db2647f8e00418?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 8:46 am
From: whack-a-troll@UseNet.org

In article <go1idr$uje$4@news.motzarella.org>,
John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:
>Argon wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>>
>> I want to take photos of killer bees.
>>
>> How can I do that?
>
>
>Second: Don't x-post to unrelated froup.

Silly boy.

The unrelated group is his trophy case.

When you reply to it, you are on display with all the other troll bait.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 9:25 am
From: John McWilliams

whack-a-troll@UseNet.org wrote:
> In article <go1idr$uje$4@news.motzarella.org>,
> John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Argon wrote:
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>>
>>> I want to take photos of killer bees.
>>>
>>> How can I do that?
>>
>> Second: Don't x-post to unrelated froup.
>
> Silly boy.
>
> The unrelated group is his trophy case.
>
> When you reply to it, you are on display with all the other troll bait.

Er, that's why I deleted it.....

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Is it OK to use an AC adapter while batteries are still in camera?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/01001575059892d1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 9:44 am
From: "void.no.spam.com@gmail.com"

I just got an official Canon AC Adapter for my A650 camera, and I was
wondering if it is OK to use the AC adapter without removing the
batteries?

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 2 2009 9:48 am
From: nospam

In article
<b8d0b6ca-6849-4172-9c4d-2137b1182c4e@h20g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
<"void.no.spam.com@gmail.com"> wrote:

> I just got an official Canon AC Adapter for my A650 camera, and I was
> wondering if it is OK to use the AC adapter without removing the
> batteries?

of course it is. why wouldn't it be?

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

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

Monday, March 2, 2009

rec.photo.digital - 26 new messages in 14 topics - digest

0 comments:

Live Traffic