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: Could you actually see photos made from RAW files?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c04187075ef6f9c5?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 11:42 am
From: Chris H

In message <871vq1eyu4.fld@apaflo.com>, Floyd L. Davidson
<floyd@apaflo.com> writes
>Okay. Now, is that firmware just controlling the data
>flow or is it manipulating the data?

Yes to both

> Is there a CPU
>in the ASIC?

Normally.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 2:45 pm
From: floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)

Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:
>In message <871vq1eyu4.fld@apaflo.com>, Floyd L. Davidson
><floyd@apaflo.com> writes
>>Okay. Now, is that firmware just controlling the data
>>flow or is it manipulating the data?
>
>Yes to both

Cite?

>> Is there a CPU
>>in the ASIC?
>
>Normally.

In the specific ASICs used the cameras we are talking about?

Cite?

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Poor, poor P&S owner learns too late...
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/555753247e2a15f7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 12:11 pm
From: "David J Taylor"

John Navas wrote:
[]
> We'll have to agree to disagree on "excel at most trades", but I do
> agree the TZ-series is the right balance for many people -- I often
> recommend the TZ5/TZ4 (which are significantly improved over the TZ3
> IMHO), and am looking forward to trying the new ZS3/ZS1, which I just
> might get myself for times when I want something smaller than my FZ28.

I have the TZ3 for those times when I want a very small, pocket-sized
camera, and yet not compromise too much on capabilities. I also find it
handy for movies. I haven't felt the need to upgrade just yet, but I
would expect the newer models to be even better. Within the size and
sensitivity constraints, I've been pleased with the results.

David

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 12:19 pm
From: "David J Taylor"

John Navas wrote:
[]
> Not with comparable speed, optical quality, size, weight, and handling
> ease. It's not an apples and apples comparison when you ignore these
> factors. I lugged a complete 35 mm kit around Europe long ago, and
> it's not something I'd ever want to do again, even for local outings.

Yes, the DSLR offers much faster operation, better optical quality, and
handling ease. I found that the single DSLR and two lenses weighed about
the same as the two P&S cameras I had to carry before.

I, too, have used a 35mm outfit with multiple lenses in the past, and also
found the size and weight more than I wanted. The reduction in size and
weight with today's compact DSLRs, the DX (reduced circle of coverage)
zoom lenses, and lighter materials in construction makes carrying a
two-lens outfit a much different proposition than it was 20 years ago. I
still find room for the Panasonic TZ3, though, and I can have the best of
both worlds.

David

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 12:46 pm
From: John Navas

On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 19:19:37 GMT, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid> wrote in
<d7VVl.37945$OO7.24475@text.news.virginmedia.com>:

>John Navas wrote:
>[]
>> Not with comparable speed, optical quality, size, weight, and handling
>> ease. It's not an apples and apples comparison when you ignore these
>> factors. I lugged a complete 35 mm kit around Europe long ago, and
>> it's not something I'd ever want to do again, even for local outings.
>
>Yes, the DSLR offers much faster operation, better optical quality, and
>handling ease. I found that the single DSLR and two lenses weighed about
>the same as the two P&S cameras I had to carry before.

Not as compared to my single FZ28.

>I, too, have used a 35mm outfit with multiple lenses in the past, and also
>found the size and weight more than I wanted. The reduction in size and
>weight with today's compact DSLRs, the DX (reduced circle of coverage)
>zoom lenses, and lighter materials in construction makes carrying a
>two-lens outfit a much different proposition than it was 20 years ago.

My 35 mm kit was/is much more complete than just two zoom lenses.

>I
>still find room for the Panasonic TZ3, though, and I can have the best of
>both worlds.

A single FZ28 is the current best for most of my needs.

"Different strokes for different folks."

--
Best regards,
John
Panasonic DMC-FZ28 (and several others)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photographer sues and loses.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/26e6a596f8251962?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 12:25 pm
From: John McWilliams

Henry K. Lee, SF Chronicle Staff
Wednesday, June 3, 2009

> A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by an Oakland Tribune
> photographer who accused officers of illegally barring him from taking
> pictures at a freeway crash scene and handcuffing him when he persisted.
>
>
> Ray Chavez, 45, said officers had interfered with his right as a member of
> the press to cover news, specifically a car crash and the emergency response
> time. The 2007 incident caused him to be "arrested and handcuffed without
> justification solely due to the exercise of First Amendment rights," said
> his suit, filed in U.S. District Court.
>
>
> But in a ruling Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco
> dismissed the suit, saying the media has no First Amendment rights to access
> accident or crime scenes if the general public was excluded.
>
>
> Breyer said Chavez "does not offer any evidence that suggests that the
> general public had a right to exit their vehicles on the freeway and stand
> in the freeway to take photographs. Moreover, common sense dictates that
> members of the general public are not allowed to exit their cars in the
> middle of the freeway to view an accident scene."
>
>
> Chavez said that he was "so disappointed with the judge's decision."
>
>
> On May 4, 2007, Chavez was driving north on Interstate 880 near the 29th
> Avenue exit in Oakland when a car in front of him crashed and rolled over in
> the fast lane. Chavez, wearing his press credential around his neck, got out
> of his car and began taking pictures, "considering this a spot news matter,"
> the suit said.
>
>
> Oakland police Officer Kevin Reynolds told Chavez that he should leave, the
> suit said. When Chavez replied that he had a right to be there as a member
> of the press, Reynolds angrily told him that he "didn't have any business
> here (and) that it was a crime scene," the suit said.
>
>
> After Chavez took photos of an arriving ambulance, Reynolds blocked his
> camera and told him, "You don't need to take these kind of photos,"
> according to the suit.
>
>
> Reynolds asked for Chavez's identification and began writing him a citation,
> the suit said. As a California Highway Patrol cruiser arrived, Chavez again
> took pictures. That prompted Reynolds to say, "That's it.
> You're under arrest," the suit said.
>
>
> The officer made Chavez sit next to the overturned car with his hands behind
> his back for a half-hour, the suit said. Passing motorists mistakenly
> believed Chavez had caused the crash and "cursed and made derogatory
> references to and signs at plaintiff while he sat on the ground handcuffed,"
> the suit said.
>
>
> Oakland police Officer Cesar Garcia told Chavez that he would be cited for
> impeding traffic and failing to obey a lawful order. The officers gave him
> the citation, removed the handcuffs and let him go, but not before Reynolds
> warned him, "Don't ever come here again to take these kinds of photos," the
> suit said.
>
>
> Chavez was named photojournalist of the year in 2008 by the National
> Association of Hispanic Journalists. He has been with the Tribune for 15
> years.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 2:11 pm
From: "jaf"

"John McWilliams" <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote in message news:h09741$ttj$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Henry K. Lee, SF Chronicle Staff
> Wednesday, June 3, 2009
>
>
>> A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by an Oakland Tribune
>> photographer who accused officers of illegally barring him from taking
>> pictures at a freeway crash scene and handcuffing him when he persisted.
>>
>>
>> Ray Chavez, 45, said officers had interfered with his right as a member of
>> the press to cover news, specifically a car crash and the emergency response
>> time. The 2007 incident caused him to be "arrested and handcuffed without
>> justification solely due to the exercise of First Amendment rights," said
>> his suit, filed in U.S. District Court.
>>
>>
>> But in a ruling Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco
>> dismissed the suit, saying the media has no First Amendment rights to access
>> accident or crime scenes if the general public was excluded.
>>

I don't recall reading that in the bill of rights.

>> Breyer said Chavez "does not offer any evidence that suggests that the
>> general public had a right to exit their vehicles on the freeway and stand
>> in the freeway to take photographs. Moreover, common sense dictates that
>> members of the general public are not allowed to exit their cars in the
>> middle of the freeway to view an accident scene."
>>
>>
>> Chavez said that he was "so disappointed with the judge's decision."
>>
>>
>> On May 4, 2007, Chavez was driving north on Interstate 880 near the 29th
>> Avenue exit in Oakland when a car in front of him crashed and rolled over in
>> the fast lane. Chavez, wearing his press credential around his neck, got out
>> of his car and began taking pictures, "considering this a spot news matter,"
>> the suit said.
>>
>>
>> Oakland police Officer Kevin Reynolds told Chavez that he should leave, the
>> suit said. When Chavez replied that he had a right to be there as a member
>> of the press, Reynolds angrily told him that he "didn't have any business
>> here (and) that it was a crime scene," the suit said.
>>
>>
>> After Chavez took photos of an arriving ambulance, Reynolds blocked his
>> camera and told him, "You don't need to take these kind of photos,"
>> according to the suit.
>>

Ahh! Cops inventing laws again.

>> Reynolds asked for Chavez's identification and began writing him a citation,
>> the suit said. As a California Highway Patrol cruiser arrived, Chavez again
>> took pictures. That prompted Reynolds to say, "That's it.
>> You're under arrest," the suit said.
>>
>>
>> The officer made Chavez sit next to the overturned car with his hands behind
>> his back for a half-hour, the suit said. Passing motorists mistakenly
>> believed Chavez had caused the crash and "cursed and made derogatory
>> references to and signs at plaintiff while he sat on the ground handcuffed,"
>> the suit said.
>>
>>
>> Oakland police Officer Cesar Garcia told Chavez that he would be cited for
>> impeding traffic and failing to obey a lawful order. The officers gave him
>> the citation, removed the handcuffs and let him go, but not before Reynolds
>> warned him, "Don't ever come here again to take these kinds of photos," the
>> suit said.
>>
>>
>> Chavez was named photojournalist of the year in 2008 by the National
>> Association of Hispanic Journalists. He has been with the Tribune for 15
>> years.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Control some Canon DSLRs with an iPhone
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/3113e9a338c4bd4c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 12:41 pm
From: John McWilliams

A new app is available that'll allow you to use an iPhone as a remote
shutter release with many Canon DSLRs.

<http://www.ononesoftware.com/detail.php?prodLine_id=38>

If enough Nikon shooters want it, the developers of the software say
they'll make it.

--
john mcwilliams

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Inspiration
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6bce303dea7b1b86?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 1:25 pm
From: PaddleHard

Hi group,

While grateful for the rain, I'm looking for some ideas/inspiration
for shooting in rainy/overcast weather. I've found myself stuck in a
rut of only shooting in the 'right' light. Where do you get your
inspiration when your stuck in a run? Any thoughts on rainy/overcast
photography?

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 1:55 pm
From: Paul Heslop

PaddleHard wrote:
>
> Hi group,
>
> While grateful for the rain, I'm looking for some ideas/inspiration
> for shooting in rainy/overcast weather. I've found myself stuck in a
> rut of only shooting in the 'right' light. Where do you get your
> inspiration when your stuck in a run? Any thoughts on rainy/overcast
> photography?

low light/night stuff. something where there is a single source of
light where the rain will catch in it and be highlighted.

--
Paul (We won't die of devotion)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 1:59 pm
From: PaddleHard

On Jun 4, 4:55 pm, Paul Heslop <paul.hes...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> PaddleHard wrote:
>
> > Hi group,
>
> > While grateful for the rain, I'm looking for some ideas/inspiration
> > for shooting in rainy/overcast weather. I've found myself stuck in a
> > rut of only shooting in the 'right' light. Where do you get your
> > inspiration when your stuck in a run? Any thoughts on rainy/overcast
> > photography?
>
> low light/night stuff. something where there is a single source of
> light where the rain will catch in it and be highlighted.
>
> --
> Paul (We won't die of devotion)
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Stop and Lookhttp://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

Wow! I can see the picture already! Thanks, Paul...and I like your
signature "Stop and Look". Makes sense.

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 3:09 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-04 13:59:47 -0700, PaddleHard <ipaddle4fun@gmail.com> said:

> On Jun 4, 4:55 pm, Paul Heslop <paul.hes...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> PaddleHard wrote:
>>
>>> Hi group,
>>
>>> While grateful for the rain, I'm looking for some ideas/inspiration
>>> for shooting in rainy/overcast weather. I've found myself stuck in a
>>> rut of only shooting in the 'right' light. Where do you get your
>>> inspiration when your stuck in a run? Any thoughts on rainy/overcast
>>> photography?
>>
>> low light/night stuff. something where there is a single source of
>> light where the rain will catch in it and be highlighted.
>>
>> --
>> Paul (We won't die of devotion)
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> Stop and Lookhttp://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
>
> Wow! I can see the picture already! Thanks, Paul...and I like your
> signature "Stop and Look". Makes sense.

Yes, use the light. Shoot in RAW if possible and your results will be
interesting.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DSC_0498w.jpg
--
Regards,

Savageduck

==============================================================================
TOPIC: A "civil contract" in photography
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/62d4cf0a6c3bd6b1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 1:40 pm
From: "Frank ess"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/arts/design/04abroad.html?th&emc=th

The author of that article talks about a "civil contract" in
photography.

What is he talking about?

If you understand it the way I think he means, as exemplified in the
works he mentions, do you violate it?

If not, why not?

Would you violate the "civil contract" under the right conditions?
What are those conditions?

--
Frank ess

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 2:59 pm
From: tony cooper

On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 13:40:04 -0700, "Frank ess" <frank@fshe2fs.com>
wrote:

>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/arts/design/04abroad.html?th&emc=th
>
>The author of that article talks about a "civil contract" in
>photography.
>
>What is he talking about?

This writer, on the same subject, explains it a little better:
http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11563
The writer identifies the civil contract as "a particular set of
relations between individuals to the power that governs them, and, at
the same time, a form of relations among equal individuals that
constrains this power."

If you read the part of the article you cited dealing with Marc
Garanger photographing Algerian women with the above explanation in
mind, you should be able to understand the term better. The Algerian
women were forced to have their faces photographed by an agent of the
government in violation of their civil contract.

>If you understand it the way I think he means, as exemplified in the
>works he mentions, do you violate it?

It really wouldn't come up for me. I have no power to exert over
anyone.

It's essential to understand that a violation of the civil contract is
not a violation in any other way. If you photograph the mayor's wife
drunk and squatting to pee in a city park, and send that photograph to
the newspaper, you may be violating a civil contract (relations among
equal individuals) but you are not committing a legal violation. The
word "contract" in this context is not the same as a legal contract,
and the word "violation" is not used in the legal sense.

>If not, why not?
>
>Would you violate the "civil contract" under the right conditions?
>What are those conditions?

That question contains a conflict. If the conditions are "right",
then there is no civil contract. If I feel that the publication of
the photograph of the mayor's wife is the right thing to do, then I
have no civil contract issue to deal with. The civil contract is an
issue of morality.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 3:01 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-04 13:40:04 -0700, "Frank ess" <frank@fshe2fs.com> said:

> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/arts/design/04abroad.html?th&emc=th
>
> The author of that article talks about a "civil contract" in photography.
>
> What is he talking about?

Censorship of the unpleasant.

>
> If you understand it the way I think he means, as exemplified in the
> works he mentions, do you violate it?

Not yet,
>
> If not, why not?

No opportunity.
>
> Would you violate the "civil contract" under the right conditions? What
> are those conditions?

Yes, if the opportunity arose, and if the publication was more
important than public sensibilities and any reputation I thought I
might have.

The withdrawal, or non-publication of photographs under the guise of
"civil contract" is nothing but censorship.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 3:32 pm
From: floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)

"Frank ess" <frank@fshe2fs.com> wrote:
>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/arts/design/04abroad.html?th&emc=th
>
>The author of that article talks about a "civil contract" in
>photography.
>
>What is he talking about?
>
>If you understand it the way I think he means, as exemplified in the
>works he mentions, do you violate it?
>
>If not, why not?
>
>Would you violate the "civil contract" under the right conditions?
>What are those conditions?

That is an interesting article, I'll grant... but
probably only for those who already understand the
subject. The point of view taken and the examples given
are all good choices and informative, but I didn't think
the text of the article glued them together well.

I would suggest reading Susan Sontag's "On Photography",
which I thought should have been mentioned in the leading
paragraphs of that article rather than being saved for the
end. (I'd have exchanged the comments/examples using
Cartier-Bresson with Sontag.)

Interestingly, that article has a link to a list of
other Times articles mentioning Sontag. At the top of
the list is a wonderful portrait of her, by
Cartier-Bresson! Listed to the left of that list are
links to other sources about Sontag, including a 1977
"review" by William Gass of Sontag's "On Photography".
I put review in quotes because it isn't. It is his own
essay, essentially saying he wished he'd written about
it before Sontag because he also thinks the same and
believes he has a way with words... :-)

"... then what of the most promiscuous and
sensually primitive of all our gadgets -- the camera
-- which copulates with the world merely by widening
its eye, and thus so simply fertilized, divided
itself as quietly as amoebas do, and with a gentle
buzz slides its newborn image into view on a coated
tongue?"

If you don't mind, I'll stick with Sontag:

"To photograph people is to violate them."
--Susan Sontag, "On Photography"

"...the very question of whether photography is or is
not an art is essentially a misleading one. Although
photography generates works that can be called art --
it requires subjectivity, it can lie, it gives
aesthetic pleasure -- photography is not, to begin
with, an art form at all. Like language, it is a
medium in which works of art (among other things) are
made. Out of language, one can make scientific
discourse, bureaucratic memoranda, love letters,
grocery lists, and Balzac's Paris. Out of
photography, one can make passport pictures, weather
photographs, pornographic pictures, X-rays, wedding
pictures, and Atget's Paris."
-- Susan Sontag , "On Photography"

I personally have learned as much about photography from
Susan Sontag as I have from Ansel Adams or Dorothea Lange.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: grim news for photographers tourism and rights
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/f739094ebddaa70e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 2:35 pm
From: floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)

tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 13:17:12 +0100, "whisky-dave"
><whisky-dave@final.front.ear> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Floyd L. Davidson" <floyd@apaflo.com> wrote in message
>>news:87bpp4erjp.fld@apaflo.com...
>>> tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:38:52 -0800, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L.
>>>>
>>
>>>>Your knowledge of law has the same flight characteristics of an iron
>>>>ball. Possession of lock picks is a criminal act in some states.
>>>
>>> So every locksmith is a criminal eh? Talking about
>>> flying lead bricks!
>>
>>This does seem rather strange, here in the UK if yuo're found in
>>possession of lock picks (I believe locksmiths are registared) you'd have to
>>provide proof that you are a locksmith otherwise you'd be expected to
>>explain why you had such items.
>
>It's not strange at all. Floyd's shaky logic in making that assertion
>is misleading. Registered or licensed locksmiths are exempted, and
>even Floyd knows that.

That assertion was yours, and so is the shaky logic.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 2:37 pm
From: floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)

tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:08:07 -0800, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L.
>Davidson) wrote:
>
>>tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:06:18 -0800, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L.
>>>Davidson) wrote:
>>>My "broad statement" was "in some states". I have cited Virginia, and
>>>will now cite Tennessee to justify the plural. Public Act, Chapter
>>>885, Senate Bill 2024, in the Public Acts of 2006 states: "(g) No
>>>person who is not licensed under this act shall possess, use, sell, or
>>>offer to sell any code book, lock picking tool, manipulation key,
>>>try-out key, safe opening tool,or car opening tool."
>>
>>I assume you have been just as brain dead in this case
>>as you are with the Virginia example. While the above
>>law does what you say it does, note that it is a law to
>>require licensing of locksmiths, just as the practice of
>>medicine requires a license, and several other trades
>>probably including plumbers and electricians and some of
>>them with criminal penalties for certain actions restricted
>>only to those who are so licensed.
>
>>The law that relates to our discussion is this one:
>>
>>See Tennesse Code, Section 39-14-701
>> "Possession of burglary tools. A person who possesses
>> any tool, machine or implement with intent to use the
>> same, or allow the same to be used, to commit any
>> burglary, commits a Class A misdemeanor."
>
>Sloppy reading, Floyd. The Tennessee law I cited is dated 2006 and
>amends the 1989 law you cited. It is headed: AN ACT to amend
>Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 29 and Title 62,
>relative to locksmiths. In other words, what I cited is the law
>*now*.

Learn to read. The 2006 law does not amend the 1989 law. They
are two distinctly different issues.

As I mentioned before, it isn't surprising that you can't
figure this out.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 2:43 pm
From: floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)

tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Jun 2009 21:41:17 -0800, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L.
>Davidson) wrote:
>
>>>The bit about the objects not being "inherently burglarious" was the
>>>defense claim about the nature of keys. However, the court found that
>>>these particular keys - special vending machine keys - were tools and
>>>thus covered by the Code.
>>
>>Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Sheesh, can't you read at all?
>>
>> 'Thus, to convict an accused for possession of "any
>> tools, implements, or outfit" not inherently
>> burglarious, like the subject keys, the Commonwealth
>> must establish the requisite intent *without* *benefit*
>> *of* *the* *statutory* *presumption*.' [emphasis added]
>
>>That was not what the defendant claimed, that is what
>>the judge ruled the law to mean. He then went on to say
>>that the Commonwealth had not relied on the statutory
>>presumption at trial. (We don't care about what they
>>did rely on, as neither of us disputes those grounds for
>>conviction.)
>
>The judge was responding to the defense's claim that keys did not fall
>under the rule of law. The judges comments dealt with that speaking
>of "the subject keys" and not other items that might be a part of a
>future case. This was necessary because keys are a common household
>item whereas lock picks are not.

Keep trying... but it still remains that the judge's
description of the reasoning and intend of the law is
now part of the law, and can and will be cited in other
cases.

The judge's comment was in to way restricted only to
"the subject of keys, but to objects "like the subject
keys", which of course he stated very plainly as being
"any tools, implements, or outfit...". Learn to read.

>>This "statutory presumption" may not be operative in
>>that case, but the ruling is case law that defines
>>exactly what the court believes the law to mean. And
>>that is exactly what *is* operative for our discussion.
>>
>>The facts are that in the Commonwealth of Virginia the
>>Court of Appeals has clearly stated that I can stand on
>>any corner in any city with a hand full of lock pics
>>without necessarily violating any law.
>
>No, the judge's ruling allows anyone to stand on a corner in Virginia
>with a handful of keys and not be in violation of a law for that
>alone. It does not exculpate the person standing on a corner with a
>handful of lock picks.

Oh stop being pathetic. Learn to read.

The rest of this article was too childish to bother with.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 3:40 pm
From: tony cooper

On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 13:37:36 -0800, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

>>Sloppy reading, Floyd. The Tennessee law I cited is dated 2006 and
>>amends the 1989 law you cited. It is headed: AN ACT to amend
>>Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 29 and Title 62,
>>relative to locksmiths. In other words, what I cited is the law
>>*now*.
>
>Learn to read. The 2006 law does not amend the 1989 law. They
>are two distinctly different issues.
>
Certainly it does, Floyd. What in the world do you think that the
term "AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 29
and Title 62, relative to locksmiths" means?

When the Code is amended, any provisions in the previous laws within
the Code in conflict with the new laws are invalid. Any provisions in
the new laws that add to the previous version are valid.

The new law can consolidate issues. If there were several issues
pertaining to locksmiths and locksmithing tools (and this includes the
possession of them by people unauthorized by the new law) in different
laws contained in the Tennessee Code, the new law can consolidate
these issues. The new law prevails.

This is an extremely common way of dealing with a patchwork of laws in
order to bring all relative issues under one law.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

==============================================================================
TOPIC: No more doubts about the SB900 power !!! (sample photos)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/048eb5829deae882?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 3:08 pm
From: "Bertram Paul"

Taken in the biggest caves of Portugal, with the flash set at normal (not
tele!) and ISO 400:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bertram-paul/3596302086/in/set-72157619252249256/

--
---
Bertram Paul

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 3:40 pm
From: Steven Green

Bertram Paul wrote:
> Taken in the biggest caves of Portugal, with the flash set at normal (not
> tele!) and ISO 400:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/bertram-paul/3596302086/in/set-72157619252249256/
>

I have been looking for flashes for my Nikon, but the SB900 is too big
and too expensive, but your post makes me a little curious.

Do you have a shot without the flash at the same settings to compare it to?

Steven Green

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 3:46 pm
From: DMac

Now if you can just repeat that 20 time and not fry the flash...

I'm the silly one who took Nikon's advice when I complained about that
flash shutting down for 15 minutes after 15 or so continuous shots.

They told me to upgrade the firmware, turn off the thermal nanny and buy
a remote battery pack to get the battery heat away from the flash
head... Just remember that last piece of info.

So off I trundled to my favourite camera store and bought a SD-9 battery
holder for $400 (AUD)and $50 (AUD) worth of Enloop batteries for it.

Guess what?
It won't work without batteries in the flash too!

Can you imagine how much extra weight a D700 carries when you bolt an
SD-9 under it? Only to find out it still craps itself but without
shutting down. Just keeps going until it fries it's innards.

$390 for a new circuit board later... I realised the power you tried to
demonstrate with that shot, is only available with a cold flash and you
only get a handful of hits before it overheats. Probably quite OK for
your use but out in the bright sun... Uh, uh.

Shelling out $1390 (AUD) for a Metz 76MZ-5 teaches me that toys like the
SB900 can never equal the professional gear they try to impersonate.

SB 900 = $760
SD battery pack = $400
Repairs (no warranty) $390

Total minus batteries, $1550

Cheaper to have bought the Metz in the first place! Which incidentally
overheats too but not anywhere as fast as the Nikon does.

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 4:20 pm
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-06-04 15:08:21 -0700, "Bertram Paul" <dont@mail.me> said:

> Taken in the biggest caves of Portugal, with the flash set at normal (not
> tele!) and ISO 400:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/bertram-paul/3596302086/in/set-72157619252249256/

The SB-900 is certainly an impressive flash for its size. I use mine
constantly.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Use your build-in flash better!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/e73c75a13086e0a0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Jun 4 2009 3:41 pm
From: "Charles"

On-board flash sucks (according to the site) but can be fixed with styrofoam
cups. Amazing!

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

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

Thursday, June 4, 2009

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

0 comments:

Live Traffic

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Thursday, June 4, 2009

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

0 comments:

Search

Live Traffic