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: World of Differences
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/3833a21b5ea8fed3?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 2:28 pm
From: "Dudley Hanks"

"Justin C" <justin.0904@purestblue.com> wrote in message
news:slrngu79sf.18os.justin.0904@Macintosh.local...
> In article <u_yEl.21699$Db2.16482@edtnps83>, Dudley Hanks wrote:
>> Coming Soon:
>>
>> http://www.blind-apertures.ca/nature
>>
>> http://www.blind-apertures.ca/guidedogs
>
> I'm not gonna bookmark 'em Dud, let us know when there's something to
> see.
>
> Justin.
>
> --
> Justin C, by the sea.

No prob...

By the end of the week, I'm hoping to have some stuff there. Would have
been sooner, but got "sidetracked" by Jerry, so I want to set up a quick
site for sociopolitical / religious rants and squabbles.

Shouldn't take long.

Take Care,
Dudley

==============================================================================
TOPIC: I hate environmentalists
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/32b4ab5866516ef6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 2:33 pm
From: Twibil

On Apr 13, 11:36 am, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:
> On 2009-04-13 11:05:50 -0700, Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> said:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 12, 11:24 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:
>
> >>> (In a related story, psychologists have discovered that it's
> >>> invariably the least intelligent and least educated people who see and
> >>> state things in absolutes. Brighter souls recognise that there are
> >>> seldom cases where there are pure blacks and pure whites, and tend to
> >>> concentrate on distinguishing the shades of grey in any given
> >>> situation. For an example, see the differences between Sarah Palin and
> >>> John McCain...)
>
> >> She has much more appealing legs.
>
> > You betcha she does!!
>
> > And the striking intellect of a three-week-dead Haddock.
>
> I see we are in complete agreement.
> Though from Alaska it is more likely to be a monkfish or cod.

Ah, but why do you suppose it died? <G>

~Pete

== 2 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 3:04 pm
From: John McWilliams

Jürgen Exner wrote:
> tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> [...] the statement that "VAT on
>> consumer goods is in the range 15% to 20%, whereas US sales tax is
>> typically half of that or less." most certainly implies that VAT and
>> Sales Tax can be compared as the revenue available for public service.
>>
>> That is incorrect.
>
> 'cuse me, but what _IS_ sales tax used for if not for building and
> maintaining roads, police, firefighters, schools and education,
> subsidies for public transportation, arts and performances, etc, etc?

Salaries for the clerks and commissioners who count it.

--
john mcwilliams

== 3 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 3:13 pm
From: Jürgen Exner

Alan Browne <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>Ron Hunter wrote:

>Religion demands faith and belief in the absence of any concrete
>evidence. That's why brainwashing the young is so important.
>
>Science doesn't get rigorous until kids select electives such as
>biology, chemistry and physics in high school.

And even more important: science doesn't threaten you with eternal
damnation if you don't believe in it.

jue

== 4 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 3:38 pm
From: Alan Browne

Jürgen Exner wrote:
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>> Religion demands faith and belief in the absence of any concrete
>> evidence. That's why brainwashing the young is so important.
>>
>> Science doesn't get rigorous until kids select electives such as
>> biology, chemistry and physics in high school.
>
> And even more important: science doesn't threaten you with eternal
> damnation if you don't believe in it.

I had put something like that in my reply, but edited it out as a bit
strong. (Trying to be reasonable... never pays off).

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

== 5 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 3:45 pm
From: "Ken Hart"

"Savageduck" <savageduck@savage.net> wrote in message
news:2009041223245016807-savageduck@savagenet...
> On 2009-04-12 23:15:42 -0700, Twibil <nowayjose6@gmail.com> said:
>
>> On Apr 12, 8:00 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>> You really are an insane fanatic.
>>
>> You mean that heretofore there had been some doubt in your mind?
>>
>> (In a related story, psychologists have discovered that it's
>> invariably the least intelligent and least educated people who see and
>> state things in absolutes. Brighter souls recognise that there are
>> seldom cases where there are pure blacks and pure whites, and tend to
>> concentrate on distinguishing the shades of grey in any given
>> situation. For an example, see the differences between Sarah Palin and
>> John McCain...)
>
> She has much more appealing legs.
> --
> Regards,
> Savageduck
>
And possibly a larger penis than his...

== 6 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 3:46 pm
From: Alan Browne

Ron Hunter wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>> Rich wrote:
>>>>>>> These people are the kind who want nature reserved only for their
>>>>>>> kind,
>>>>>> What you know about man's impact on the environment can be written
>>>>>> with a Sharpie on a postage stamp.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Probably better than what rabid environmentalists seem to believe,
>>>>> which is that humans should just disappear from the face of the
>>>>> earth, and leave it to the animals.
>>>> What a pathetic and angry distortion. Environmentalism is about
>>>> harmony and balance with the environment.
>>>>
>>>> The environment is our sustenance. Better take care of it. We're
>>>> collectively failing to do so.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Are you saying that there AREN'T those in the environmentalist
>>> movement that DO advocate the end of all human existence? If so,
>>> then you need to pay more attention to them.
>>
>> Ignoring the logic failing of the paragraph above...
>>
>> No I don't need to pay attention to them. There are always extreme
>> fringes in any category of people and the likelihood that they will
>> cause any great harm is fairly nil in the greater context.
>>
>> Your assertion that all "rabid" environmentalists advocate the end of
>> humanity is plain wrong and just tainted propaganda.
>>
> Who gave you the right to define my terms?

Just keeping the ship in the narrows of the channel. You replied to
general ranting lunatic Rich in a way that paints all environmentalists
as rabid. They are a tiny minority and just as effective and dangerous
as "mountain men" who want to overthrow the Gummint in Washington.

> To ME a 'rabid
> environmentalist' IS one who goes so far as to advocate extermination of
> humans, and return of the earth to the animals.

So what? Gather all 1,207 of them together and spank them.

You're getting worked up over a tiny sliver of a minority of
environmentalists.

And now that you're ignoring them, take stock of your life, your habits
and lifestyle and start a list of things you can do to reduce your
impact on the environment. Chances are nobody will get hurt, you'll
save some money and reduce environmental decay - you might even lose a
few pounds if overweight.

== 7 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 3:49 pm
From: Bruce

Jürgen Exner <jurgenex@hotmail.com> wrote:
>tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>[...] the statement that "VAT on
>>consumer goods is in the range 15% to 20%, whereas US sales tax is
>>typically half of that or less." most certainly implies that VAT and
>>Sales Tax can be compared as the revenue available for public service.
>>
>>That is incorrect.
>
>'cuse me, but what _IS_ sales tax used for if not for building and
>maintaining roads, police, firefighters, schools and education,
>subsidies for public transportation, arts and performances, etc, etc?

It's a good question. This link seems to suggest that the State of
Florida collects sales tax in order to help pay for services:

http://miami.about.com/b/2007/02/18/florida-sales-tax-rates.htm

== 8 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 3:51 pm
From: Bruce

Jürgen Exner <jurgenex@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Alan Browne <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>>Religion demands faith and belief in the absence of any concrete
>>evidence. That's why brainwashing the young is so important.
>>
>>Science doesn't get rigorous until kids select electives such as
>>biology, chemistry and physics in high school.
>
>And even more important: science doesn't threaten you with eternal
>damnation if you don't believe in it.

If, as a world community, we choose not to "believe in" climate change,
then it will certainly threaten future generations with something
closely approximating to eternal damnation - permanent flooding of most
of Florida, for example.

== 9 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 4:01 pm
From: Alan Browne

Ron Hunter wrote:

> If you want a really good description of the 'big bang
> theory', in strictly non-technical terms, read the first chapter of
> Genesis.

Genesis is not a description of either the "big bang" nor "big bang
theory". It's just creationism. In fact it is wrong as Genesis (I'm
going from memory here, not even Wkiki'ng it) refers to the universe as
a void. The universe was not 'there', so there was no void. And God
created everything from nothingness, however that's not possible. At
the big bang, everything there is was contained in a tiny volume.

Create the canvas. Paint on it. That's about as close to the big bang
as Genesis gets.

Here's the big bang in non technical terms:

"All the matter of the entire universe was
squeezed into a ball billions and billions*
of times smaller than the finest grain of flour.

Then, all hell broke loose."

*Use Carl Sagan voice here.

> From there, it is mostly allegory. The Bible is pretty good
> history, but it is a bit of a stretch to take it all literally,

You just proved what Schermer (Scientific American, May 2009, p.32) said
about hindsight bias in religious people looking for physics in the bible.

> given
> that even the earliest texts were recorded from oral tradition. As you
> probably can guess, I am not a fundamentalist Christian.

Can't guess that at all. Maybe you're a fundamentalist Jew or Muslim.
They also get all worked up about creationism where more moderate Jews
and Muslims are much more agreed on evolution as representing what is
most likely the real story.

== 10 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 5:12 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-04-13 14:33:05 -0700, Twibil <nowayjose6@gmail.com> said:

> On Apr 13, 11:36 am, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:
>> On 2009-04-13 11:05:50 -0700, Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> said:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 12, 11:24 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>> (In a related story, psychologists have discovered that it's
>>>>> invariably the least intelligent and least educated people who see an
> d
>>>>> state things in absolutes. Brighter souls recognise that there are
>>>>> seldom cases where there are pure blacks and pure whites, and tend to
>>>>> concentrate on distinguishing the shades of grey in any given
>>>>> situation. For an example, see the differences between Sarah Palin an
> d
>>>>> John McCain...)
>>
>>>> She has much more appealing legs.
>>
>>> You betcha she does!!
>>
>>> And the striking intellect of a three-week-dead Haddock.
>>
>> I see we are in complete agreement.
>> Though from Alaska it is more likely to be a monkfish or cod.
>
> Ah, but why do you suppose it died? <G>
>
> ~Pete

Campaign fatigue.
--
Regards,
Savageduck

== 11 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 6:38 pm
From: "J. Clarke"

John McWilliams wrote:
> Jürgen Exner wrote:
>> tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> [...] the statement that "VAT on
>>> consumer goods is in the range 15% to 20%, whereas US sales tax is
>>> typically half of that or less." most certainly implies that VAT and
>>> Sales Tax can be compared as the revenue available for public
>>> service. That is incorrect.
>>
>> 'cuse me, but what _IS_ sales tax used for if not for building and
>> maintaining roads, police, firefighters, schools and education,
>> subsidies for public transportation, arts and performances, etc, etc?
>
> Salaries for the clerks and commissioners who count it.

In the US "clerks and commissioners" do not "count" sales tax, it is counted
by the shopkeeper or his accountant on his dime.

== 12 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 7:13 pm
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

Twibil <nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote:
> Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

>> > (In a related story, psychologists have discovered that it's
>> > invariably the least intelligent and least educated people who see and
>> > state things in absolutes. Brighter souls recognise that there are
>> > seldom cases where there are pure blacks and pure whites, and tend to
>> > concentrate on distinguishing the shades of grey in any given
>> > situation. For an example, see the differences between Sarah Palin and
>> > John McCain...)
>>
>> She has much more appealing legs.
>
>You betcha she does!!
>
>And the striking intellect of a three-week-dead Haddock.

Pretty ladies don't need to be smart.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Most Intelligent Interpolation Software
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/4e2858c8f8bb9ce4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 2:38 pm
From: "David J. Littleboy"

"T. Parker" <tomparker52@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 6, 1:24 pm, "David J. Littleboy" <davi...@gol.com> wrote:
>
> Better answer: learn how to "set the black and white points", and,
> slightly
> more generally, learn how to use the Levels operation in Photoshop.
>
> Try this site for some basics:http://scantips.com

About "set the black and white points". What option
is that located in Photoshop? Can't find it. And
what levels are you talking about? Where is it? Thanks.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

"Levels" is the levels control in Photoshop. <Ctrl>+L opens it.
The "black and white points" are the controls at the left and right (that
start out at 0 and 255, respectively) in that dialog box.

"Levels" itself is a simplified "Curves" control, which is accessed by
<Ctrl>+M.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Close-Up is available for viewing
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/21a334c20daf593b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 3:30 pm
From: MJW

Bowser wrote:
> MJW wrote:
>> Troy Piggins wrote:
>>> * Atheist Chaplain wrote :
>>>> * tony cooper wrote :
>>>>> * Bowser wrote :
>>>>>
>>>>>> After a week delay due to a trip to geek hell, the fine
>>>>>> submissions sent for the Close Up mandate are on display here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/closeup
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't have much of a chance to shoot over the past month, so be
>>>>>> polite
>>>>>> and try to limit you laughter at my shots to several minutes, with
>>>>>> maximun
>>>>>> SPL of 132db. Thank you.
>>> <snip />
>>>>> Atheist Chaplain - Autos (both) - Were incorrect links used?
>>>> Umm no, the car shot was deliberate, the mandate was "Pick a lens,
>>>> any lens, and shoot something at that lens' closest focusing
>>>> distance." I interpreted that as using the closest or smallest
>>>> focusing lens length, both were shot at 18mm, the closest or
>>>> smallest length the lens is capable of, after all I
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Focusing distance is not the same as focal length ;)
>>>
>>> If you used your 18mm focal length and used it at it's closest
>>> focusing distance, then you'd be right.
>>>
>>> FWIW I don't have a problem with your submissions and I'm not
>>> trying to be picky. Glad you explained your interpretation of
>>> the mandate.
>>>
>>> I posted my comments in another thread.
>>>
>> I finally plucked up the courage to submit a pic, Troy, but it didn't
>> get put in. :-(
>> I have emailed bowser about it, maybe he will update the page.
>>
>
> I did receive a couple of more, and have uploaded them. Let me know if
> it's still missing. gmail is quirky...

Nah, still no show. This is the email address I
sent it to, si.moderator@gmail.com. I got this
from the Rulz webpage. The file name was
Close_Michael Wyllie, sent from my optusnet email
account.

>
> Also, Helen's pic has been updated with her name.

--
>>>M.J.Wyllie.<<<

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 4:58 pm
From: "Bowser"

"MJW" <me@there> wrote in message
news:49e3bcfc$0$4046$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Bowser wrote:
>> MJW wrote:
>>> Troy Piggins wrote:
>>>> * Atheist Chaplain wrote :
>>>>> * tony cooper wrote :
>>>>>> * Bowser wrote :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After a week delay due to a trip to geek hell, the fine submissions
>>>>>>> sent for the Close Up mandate are on display here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/closeup
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I didn't have much of a chance to shoot over the past month, so be
>>>>>>> polite
>>>>>>> and try to limit you laughter at my shots to several minutes, with
>>>>>>> maximun
>>>>>>> SPL of 132db. Thank you.
>>>> <snip />
>>>>>> Atheist Chaplain - Autos (both) - Were incorrect links used?
>>>>> Umm no, the car shot was deliberate, the mandate was "Pick a lens, any
>>>>> lens, and shoot something at that lens' closest focusing distance." I
>>>>> interpreted that as using the closest or smallest focusing lens
>>>>> length, both were shot at 18mm, the closest or smallest length the
>>>>> lens is capable of, after all I
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> Focusing distance is not the same as focal length ;)
>>>>
>>>> If you used your 18mm focal length and used it at it's closest
>>>> focusing distance, then you'd be right.
>>>>
>>>> FWIW I don't have a problem with your submissions and I'm not
>>>> trying to be picky. Glad you explained your interpretation of
>>>> the mandate.
>>>>
>>>> I posted my comments in another thread.
>>>>
>>> I finally plucked up the courage to submit a pic, Troy, but it didn't
>>> get put in. :-(
>>> I have emailed bowser about it, maybe he will update the page.
>>>
>>
>> I did receive a couple of more, and have uploaded them. Let me know if
>> it's still missing. gmail is quirky...
>
> Nah, still no show. This is the email address I sent it to,
> si.moderator@gmail.com. I got this from the Rulz webpage. The file name
> was Close_Michael Wyllie, sent from my optusnet email account.

Shoot, it isn't there. Maybe it's time to dump gmail. Try sending it here,
please:

dman3 at yahoo dot com

But! replace the digit "3" with "three." Appreciate your patience.

>
>>
>> Also, Helen's pic has been updated with her name.
>
>
> --
> >>>M.J.Wyllie.<<<

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 5:05 pm
From: MJW

Bowser wrote:
>
> "MJW" <me@there> wrote in message
> news:49e3bcfc$0$4046$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>> Bowser wrote:
>>> MJW wrote:
>>>> Troy Piggins wrote:
>>>>> * Atheist Chaplain wrote :
>>>>>> * tony cooper wrote :
>>>>>>> * Bowser wrote :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> After a week delay due to a trip to geek hell, the fine
>>>>>>>> submissions sent for the Close Up mandate are on display here:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/closeup
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I didn't have much of a chance to shoot over the past month, so
>>>>>>>> be polite
>>>>>>>> and try to limit you laughter at my shots to several minutes,
>>>>>>>> with maximun
>>>>>>>> SPL of 132db. Thank you.
>>>>> <snip />
>>>>>>> Atheist Chaplain - Autos (both) - Were incorrect links used?
>>>>>> Umm no, the car shot was deliberate, the mandate was "Pick a lens,
>>>>>> any lens, and shoot something at that lens' closest focusing
>>>>>> distance." I interpreted that as using the closest or smallest
>>>>>> focusing lens length, both were shot at 18mm, the closest or
>>>>>> smallest length the lens is capable of, after all I
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Focusing distance is not the same as focal length ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> If you used your 18mm focal length and used it at it's closest
>>>>> focusing distance, then you'd be right.
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW I don't have a problem with your submissions and I'm not
>>>>> trying to be picky. Glad you explained your interpretation of
>>>>> the mandate.
>>>>>
>>>>> I posted my comments in another thread.
>>>>>
>>>> I finally plucked up the courage to submit a pic, Troy, but it
>>>> didn't get put in. :-(
>>>> I have emailed bowser about it, maybe he will update the page.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I did receive a couple of more, and have uploaded them. Let me know
>>> if it's still missing. gmail is quirky...
>>
>> Nah, still no show. This is the email address I sent it to,
>> si.moderator@gmail.com. I got this from the Rulz webpage. The file
>> name was Close_Michael Wyllie, sent from my optusnet email account.
>
> Shoot, it isn't there. Maybe it's time to dump gmail. Try sending it
> here, please:
>
> dman3 at yahoo dot com
>
> But! replace the digit "3" with "three." Appreciate your patience.

Right on it!!! :-)
>
>>
>>>
>>> Also, Helen's pic has been updated with her name.
>>
>>
>> --
>> >>>M.J.Wyllie.<<<
>

--
>>>M.J.Wyllie.<<<

==============================================================================
TOPIC: SLR from camera shop not quite new
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/21fffeaa69ff38e4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 4:05 pm
From: Get lost

On Apr 13, 11:23 am, RonThe...@null.com (Ron) wrote:
> Bought a new Nikon D40 at a local shop and shot a few test shots.
> Downloaded software to view complete EXIF data since Nikon sofftware
> doesn't do that. Found that shuttercount, the number of shutter
> actuations, was 423 for my first shot. Does this seem shady to anyone?

Sure. And normal. Some camera stores are honest and would sell such
a camera as "open box" and provide a small (5%) discount. Most aren't
honest enough.

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 4:19 pm
From: M-M

In article <1iy3r6s.1cvb4a0ld43raN%RonTheGuy@null.com>,
RonTheGuy@null.com (Ron) wrote:

> Bought a new Nikon D40 at a local shop and shot a few test shots.
> Downloaded software to view complete EXIF data since Nikon sofftware
> doesn't do that. Found that shuttercount, the number of shutter
> actuations, was 423 for my first shot. Does this seem shady to anyone?

I think there are some laws or standards somewhere that allows something
to be sold as new even if used if certain criteria are met.

I once purchased a new memory card that had a collection of music on it.

These days too many people return too many things and that's the way it
has to be.

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

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 4:19 pm
From: "Focus"

"Ron" <RonTheGuy@null.com> wrote in message
news:1iy3r6s.1cvb4a0ld43raN%RonTheGuy@null.com...
> Bought a new Nikon D40 at a local shop and shot a few test shots.
> Downloaded software to view complete EXIF data since Nikon sofftware
> doesn't do that. Found that shuttercount, the number of shutter
> actuations, was 423 for my first shot. Does this seem shady to anyone?

A lot of stores offer a 10 or 14 day grace period: if you don't like the
camera, you can return it and get another one or even sometimes get your
money back.
Possible you got one that was returned.
But seriously: 423 shots is nothing. I shoot that in an afternoon.

Look at the bright side: at least it works!
--
---
Focus

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 4:23 pm
From: "Charles"

The local shop allowed folks to try the camera. It's perhaps not a virgin,
but not a big deal.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: New: Nikon D5000
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/74a657afcf04f678?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 4:07 pm
From: Get lost

On Apr 13, 11:11 am, "Focus" <d...@mail.me> wrote:
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=31583013
>
> http://www.sofmap.com/product_detail/exec/_/sku=11190059/-/gid=AW0301...
>
> 2.7 swivel screen
>
> Price about 650 ?
>
> --
> ---
> Focus

Seems (as with Olympus) the stratification of the low end is getting
finer and finer.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Just for Jerry...
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7ba5f2892276f349?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 4:20 pm
From: "Charles"

"Dudley Hanks" <dhanks@blind-apertures.ca> wrote in message
news:FENEl.21789$Db2.7410@edtnps83...
>
> "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks@blind-apertures.ca> wrote in message news:...
>> Hey, Jerry, if I set up a site with forums specifically for your
>> rantings, will you take your bigotry there and help cleanup the group?
>>
>> Take Care,
>> Dudley
>>
>>
>
> Hey, now that I think of it, I like that idea...
>
> I think I'll do it, and I'll call the site, "Right is Wrong"...
>
> Should be Fun,
> Dudley

As they used to say in the pub, "Take it outside."

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Canon & Nikon Image Stabilisation
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/aa42f50d8a88f1c8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 4:21 pm
From: "Ken Hart"

"John McWilliams" <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:gru13i$ft7$1@news.motzarella.org...
> Ken Hart wrote:
snip>>
>> I like the after-market image stabilization best- you know, the devices
>> with three legs and a 1/4"-20 bolt that threads into the bottom of the
>> camera. I think they are called "tripods".
>
> It's hell for sports, though.
>

Maybe, maybe not... I'd say a tripod is only "heck" for sports. When I shot
sports, I prefocused on a particular spot, and waited for the action to come
to that spot.
While I didn't use a tripod because of the bulk, I could envision using a
monopod.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Best Photo Scanners
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/aa72ed087c841433?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 13 2009 7:08 pm
From: Pat

On Apr 12, 11:13 pm, Jürgen Exner <jurge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Mark Franzels <markfranz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Guys, just a theoretical question and not meant to practise
> >it, but what minimum scanners and printers are enough
> >to exactly print the dollar bill so accurate that it can't
> >be distinguished from the original..
>
> It cannot be done, because bank notes are printed using steal engraving.
> The effects of that intaglio printing cannot be reproduced by other
> printing techniques. Which of course is precisely the reason, why this
> technique is used for bank notes in the first place.
>
> jue

As Jurgen suggests, intaglio printing is widely available from
commercial printers. The problem is the plates. You would need to
hand make another set. That'll take you a year or two.

No scanner in existence can scan as fine as the Bureau of Mints can
print. Most of the micro-printing on it is so fine that you can't
tell it is wording, let alone read it without assistance.

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

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