Photoshop How To Use: rec.photo.digital - 26 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: Future of the megapixel race
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c78a5377356e2e48?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:10 am
From: nospam

In article <4a45c2a7$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
<bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote:

> Don't get me started on audiophools...
> <http://grumpyoldarts.com/2009/04/18/audiophools/>

they're a hoot. how about a 770 pound turntable that uses bullet-proof
wood, for only $150k:
<http://www.needledoctor.com/Clearaudio-Statement-Turntable>

and don't cheap out on the needle:
<http://www.needledoctor.com/Clearaudio-Goldfinger-Phono-Cartridge>

== 2 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:17 am
From: Bob Larter

David J Taylor wrote:
> Bob Williams wrote:
>> David J Taylor wrote:
>>> John Navas wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:03:25 +1000, ribbit <ribbit@news.group> wrote
>>>> in <7aft6gF1ur09gU1@mid.individual.net>:
>>>>
>>>>> The notion that you cannot tell the difference between a shot from
>>>>> a P&S and one from a DSLR with good quality glass is silly. Of
>>>>> course you can... Unless you only want to look at outlines.
>>>>
>>>> Nope. Sorry.
>>>
>>> I've tried the test with the cameras I have, John, and the difference
>>> was quite obvious.
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> Is it visible on an 8x10 print?
>
> I don't print. The difference was obvious filling a 20-inch 1600 x 1200
> pixel display.
>
>> I did a controlled test with a 4MP Panasonic FZ15 (P/S) with a 12X
>> Leica lens VS a 8 MP Canon Rebel XT DSLR with a kit lens.
>> I printed both images at 8x10 and the Panny/Leica combo outperformed
>> the DSLR Canon/Canon combo.
>
> The Canon kit lens had a very poor reputation, although I gather that
> the newer 18-55mm IS is a better quality lens.

Well, if you shoot with a consumer zoom on a DSLR you might as well be
shooting with a P&S anyway.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:23 am
From: Bob Larter

bugbear wrote:
> ribbit wrote:
>> You are talking to the deaf mate.
>> Not long ago a Wedding photography client complained to me that the
>> pictures from my S5 Fuji Pro showed all the skin blemishes on his new
>> wife's arms but his $150 Olympus P&S didn't.
>>
>> He thought the lack of detail from his P&S was an Olympus feature! How
>> many proponents of P&S being as good as a DSLR have the same belief?
>
> Built in "glamour retouch"! Splendid!

Mmm... Smeared detail. Yum!

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:31 am
From: Bob Larter

Alfred Molon wrote:
> I see your point, but before further increasing the pixel counts they
> should make full colour pixels. That alone would boost the effective
> resolution substantially.

In theory. The Foveon sensor falls short in practice.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

== 5 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:32 am
From: Bob Larter

Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <250620090953333025%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam says...
>
>> actually the resolution increase would be much less than 'substantial',
>
> Substantial because right now 2/3 of the colour information are just
> guessed.

"Interpolated" != "guessed".

> But do we need to reopen this discussion?

I hope not.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

== 6 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:37 am
From: Bob Larter

nospam wrote:
> In article <MPG.24af29553c73f09298c049@news.supernews.com>, Alfred
> Molon <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> it's not guessed, it's precisely calculated,
>> It's *wrongly* calculated. It's called "interpolation".
>
> interpolation does not mean the result is always wrong.
>
>>> and human vision is not
>>> that sensitive to colour resolution so you can't see the difference
>>> anyway.
>> Nonsense. Just enlarge the image and you will see the errors.
>
> if you pixel peep you can see problems no matter what camera was used.
> the fact remains that human vision can't see colour detail anywhere
> near as well as luminance detail which is why the bayer chip works a
> well as it does. blur just the colour channels in photoshop and you
> won't be able to see a difference until you use very high levels of
> blur.

Indeed. If anyone wants to try it out, you can do it in Photoshop by
converting the image to LAB, then blurring the a & b channels.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

== 7 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 6:55 am
From: Alfred Molon

In article <260620091024553082%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam says...

> interpolation does not mean the result is always wrong.

It's a guess, i.e. could be right or wrong.

> > There is no law of physics stating that a full colour sensor must have
> > more noise than a Bayer sensor.
>
> there is if the pixel is divided up into parts, since each part will
> have a lower s/n ratio. and with foveon, the conversion from the three
> layers (not true rgb) into rgb also adds noise. everything is a
> tradeoff.

You are making assumptions about the implementation. Consider the
following example:

- monochrome sensor
- place RGB colour filters on it arranged in a Bayer pattern; take a
photo
- now place a rotating wheel with three red, green and blue windows.
Take three images, a green, red and a blue one. Combine them.

The Bayer image has the same noise levels and the same dynamic range as
the full-colour image.

I'm not advocating this type of solution, just mentioning this to make
it clear that sensor performance depends on the implementation and this
need not to be the Foveon one. Some company is experimenting with three
transparent stacked colour sensitive layers, to make another example.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

== 8 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 6:55 am
From: Alfred Molon

In article <zH31m.2601$dz7.56@newsfe04.iad>, Martin Brown says...

> Interpolation of the Bayer array is generally well behaved except for
> pathological test cases designed to break it. And even then the modern
> heuristics for processing the sampled chroma data do very well.

Lots of "pathological" cases in real world scenes. Green leaves against
a blue sky, urban scenes just to make a couple of examples. Colour
changes between adjacent pixels are quite common. There are even colour
changes within a pixel, which no sensor is able to capture and just
averages out.

> You are tilting at windmills. The loss of chroma information through
> subsampling has only minor deleterious effects. Foveon is a cute
> technology but it solves a non-problem. The human eye has a higher
> resolution for luminance than it does for chrominance.

The human eye is not the measure of all things. You want to know if the
sensor has a certain resolution or not. If it is unable to capture
changes between adjacent pixels, the effective resolution is lower than
the nominal one (i.e. the pixel count).

To draw another parallel, the human eye can't see colours when it's too
dark. Should image sensors therefore also switch to monochrome in low
light levels, i.e. at night?

> > There is no law of physics stating that a full colour sensor must have
> > more noise than a Bayer sensor.
>
> But it must contain at least 2N more active sensor sites and arrange to
> filter the light into at least RGB.

You are making assumptions about the implementation here. See my other
post.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

== 9 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 1:30 am
From: "David J Taylor"

Alfred Molon wrote:
[]
> The human eye is not the measure of all things. You want to know if
> the sensor has a certain resolution or not. If it is unable to capture
> changes between adjacent pixels, the effective resolution is lower
> than the nominal one (i.e. the pixel count).

.. but the human eye is what will be viewing the majority of digital
photos.

> To draw another parallel, the human eye can't see colours when it's
> too dark. Should image sensors therefore also switch to monochrome in
> low light levels, i.e. at night?

Try making one of your night-time pictures monochrome. It can be very
effective in adding atmosphere, and all the issues of multiple
colour-temperature light sources vanish. You might even add a little
noise for more effect.

David

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anything for the Perfect Shot
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:14 am
From: "Bill Graham"

"Bob Larter" <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4a45bca2@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> Bill Graham wrote:
>>
>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:4a446d53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>> On 2009-06-25 21:43:57 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net> said:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:2009062520543516807-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>>>>> ...but then live with the consequences of that, and don't complain
>>>>>> even after you have been presented with solutions.
>>>>>> It is appears you live to complain, and having whatever you use
>>>>>> functioning optimally is not something you would put any effort into,
>>>>>> as you would not be able to complain about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> You've got to be kidding......I have spent many hundreds of hours
>>>>> reconfiguring my machine to get it to function the way I want it to.
>>>>> It still doesn't, "function optimally" because of dozens of pop-ups
>>>>> that slow it down, and annoy me, usually at start-up. I spend many
>>>>> unhappy hours removing extraneous software from it in order to get rid
>>>>> of these, but many still keep coming back, inexplicably, even though I
>>>>> go through the "proper" procedure to get rid of them. As a matter of
>>>>> fact, I have come to the conclusion that what this thing really is, is
>>>>> another TV set, whose basic purpose in life is to deliver ads to me
>>>>> under the guise of being some kind of useful tool and/or information
>>>>> source. To me, its still up in the air weather or not it is worth all
>>>>> the trouble it gives me. To be sure, it does do, or is at least
>>>>> capable of doing some miraculous things, but at the same time, it
>>>>> generates so many problems that most of the time I find that I am
>>>>> behind schedule trying to keep up with it. I have several friends who
>>>>> tell me they are glad they don't own one of these beasts, and I find
>>>>> it very hard to argue with them. They certainly get to spend a lot
>>>>> more time with their grandchildren than I do with mine.
>>>>
>>>> Well that's Vista for ya!
>>>
>>> Indeed.
>>>
>>>> Time to sell that machine, put your feet up, and find a good book to
>>>> read.
>>>
>>> Personally, I'd upgrade it to XP.
>>>
>> No. I'm a glutton for punishment. I know I am going to, "upgrade" to
>> Windows 7.
>
> Mate, if you're having this much trouble with Vista, W7 is probably going
> to be a nightmare for you.

You could be right. But, the things I don't like about Vista are the idiot
proofing.....I want an operating system that expects the user to know what
he is doing. (Even if I don't) That's how I learn. So, I will like W7 if it
allows me to do what I want. I hate VISTA because it makes it hard for me to
do what I want.....

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:32 am
From: John A.

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 00:14:06 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net>
wrote:

>
>"Bob Larter" <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:4a45bca2@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> Bill Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4a446d53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I'd upgrade it to XP.
>>>>
>>> No. I'm a glutton for punishment. I know I am going to, "upgrade" to
>>> Windows 7.
>>
>> Mate, if you're having this much trouble with Vista, W7 is probably going
>> to be a nightmare for you.
>
>You could be right. But, the things I don't like about Vista are the idiot
>proofing.....I want an operating system that expects the user to know what
>he is doing. (Even if I don't) That's how I learn. So, I will like W7 if it
>allows me to do what I want. I hate VISTA because it makes it hard for me to
>do what I want.....

In that case, forget 7, XP, even 2000, and see if you can dig up disks
and drivers for 98.

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:33 am
From: Ron Hunter

Bill Graham wrote:
> "John A." <john@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
> news:1boa45dnetnqv6j7n3t8v23o6010b4jp1i@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:21:15 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4a446d53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>>> Well that's Vista for ya!
>>>> Indeed.
>>>>
>>>>> Time to sell that machine, put your feet up, and find a good book to
>>>>> read.
>>>> Personally, I'd upgrade it to XP.
>>>>
>>> No. I'm a glutton for punishment. I know I am going to, "upgrade" to
>>> Windows
>>> 7.
>> I wish I'd downloaded the beta when it was available. I didn't think
>> to do so until a couple weeks after they closed the tap.
>>
>> I hear there's no "classic" mode. :P
>
> I understand that the upgrade will be free to current VISTA owners, so you
> might as well wait until all the bugs are out......Microsoft likes to use
> their customers as software testers........
>
Free? I VERY seriously doubt that. Also understand that going from
WinXP to Win7 will require a complete reinstall, so all applications
will have to be reinstalled. Talk about 'disincentive'!

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:36 am
From: Ron Hunter

Bill Graham wrote:
> "John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> news:k5sa4519agfda8lkm5s195n1e4dahgsmrk@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:26:49 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net>
>> wrote in <FPednXQGmr7U-tjXnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@giganews.com>:
>>
>>> "John A." <john@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:1boa45dnetnqv6j7n3t8v23o6010b4jp1i@4ax.com...
>>>> I hear there's no "classic" mode. :P
>>> I understand that the upgrade will be free to current VISTA owners,
>> Only to those who buy Vista for a specific period prior to release.
>
> Well, I just bought this one about 4 months ago, but I would probably have
> to reload all my software again after I upgraded it, and I don't want to
> have to go through THAT again....
>
Nope. Vista users will be able to move their applications, but WinXP
users will have to reinstall. Frankly, MS needs to work on this problem
since the problem of reinstalling apps, and such is a serious
disincentive to buy a new computer. I bought a new laptop (Netbook)
this month and still have not completely 'moved in'. The lack of a CD
drive on the Netbook hasn't been much of a problem so far, and with even
MS considering issuing Win7 on a flashdrive, it might prove moot. I
know that some companies offer movies on flashdrives, so I don't expect
the lack of a CD/DVD drive to be a serious problem.

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 1:25 am
From: "David J Taylor"

Bill Graham wrote:
[]
> You could be right. But, the things I don't like about Vista are the
> idiot proofing.....I want an operating system that expects the user
> to know what he is doing. (Even if I don't) That's how I learn. So, I
> will like W7 if it allows me to do what I want. I hate VISTA because
> it makes it hard for me to do what I want.....

Although I would strongly advise against it, turning off User
Authorisation Control (UAC) will remove a lot of the "idiot proofing".

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/disable-user-account-control-uac-the-easy-way-on-windows-vista/

David

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1415c1c3e6a92134?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:28 am
From: Ron Hunter

ASAAR wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:32:37 -0500, Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>> I have been kicking around on the internet, and before that on Fidonet
>> for about 25 years, and have grown a pretty thick skin, and a back that
>> sheds flames, and insults pretty well.
>
> So that explains it, I've got at least 1/2 dozen years on you so
> you're a newbie! And that's just considering modem use. My first
> computer (completely hand built) preceded that by a good number of
> years and it had no OS, just a simple monitor that had to be loaded
> from paper tape, and the boot code to load the tape I/O routine into
> memory had to be hand toggled into that same memory which at the
> time was a whopping 8k bytes, soon to be expanded to 24k so I could
> run a better BASIC interpreter. The first improvement for that
> ancient system, before the added memory was a monitor in EPROM which
> retired the paper tape.
>
> I used several of those BBS networks, some of which were really
> large multi-user BBS systems, and they often networked with other
> multi-user BBSes. I even ran one (single user, non-network) for a
> while. But before that was the first BBS, Ward and Randy's single
> user system in Chicago back in the late 1970s. No charge to use it,
> but at 300 (with luck) and more often connecting at 110 baud, long
> distance rates made it only an occasional and very brief indulgence.
>
>
>> Getting all that upset about something on newsgroups
>> isn't worth the trouble.
>
> There are a couple of guys from the old BBS networks that
> habitually got themselves vacations from the moderated BBSes due to
> repeatedly being abusive. A couple were quite knowledgeable and the
> others much less so, though they didn't realize it. I've seen them
> here in newsgroup_land. In some ways, not much has changed. :)
>
My computer experience goes back to 1964. I waited to get one of my own
until 1981, and didn't get 'online' until 1983. I ran a local BBS
system for 2.5 years, with an average 100 posts/day before shutting it
down in order to be able to use my computer more for my own purposes.
It was very interesting, and that is the only time I have not used my
real name online, although most of the regular posters knew who I was.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 4:19 am
From: Kennedy McEwen

In article <Ft6dnc-fdPlgx9jXnZ2dnUVZ_oNi4p2d@giganews.com>, Ron Hunter
<rphunter@charter.net> writes
>Kennedy McEwen wrote:
>> In article <UaednZo30ppzHtnXnZ2dnUVZ_jhi4p2d@giganews.com>, Ron
>>Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> writes
>>
>>> Why do people with no ability in debating a subject always resort to
>>>insults, and personal attacks when they run out of coherent
>>>arguments?
>> Precisely the point I was making about YOUR arrogant response!
>
>I admit to arrogance,
> thus fully deserving of all the
> personal attacks, or obscene language
> I receive.

Fixed your post for you!
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 4:11 am
From: Wolfgang Weisselberg

Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:
> John Navas wrote:

>> Please trim huge quotes to just a relevant portion, not the whole thing.
>> Thanks.

> Maybe you have the time to do that, or a newsreader that makes it
> easy, but I have neither.

Thank you for informing us that we, your audience, aren't
worth even 3 seconds of consideration.

> Skipping to the end is vastly easier,

1000 times skipping is faster than one time snipping? Don't make
me laugh.

> and
> unless you are one of the 5% of people who are still using dialup for
> newsgroup access, why bother?

Please be informed, that at least I, as part of your audience,
feel that you have in the balance nothing valuable to add if you
don't even manage basic courtesy. I will negatively score your
postings accordingly. Why should I bother to read you?

-Wolfgang

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Kodak kills Kodachrome film after 74 years
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ffab234a019b33ac?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:57 am
From: Twibil

On Jun 26, 11:51 pm, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> 74 years is a pretty darn good run for ANY technology, don't you think?
>
> > In an unrelated story, a bone flute was found not too long ago in a
> > stone-aged German cave. It works just exactly like a modern flute
> > except that it plays fewer notes.
>
> > It carbon dates to plus or minus 35,000 years.
>
> What, it might come from as much as 35,000 years in the future?

Kool! A kamera-toting Kreationist!

But in reality (as you no doubt knew perfectly well) carbon dating
cannot give you an exact date-specific age: all it can do is give you
a *range* of dates -and that's the plus or minus.

So the flute in question is *most likely* 35,000 years old, but it
might be anywhere from (for instance) 31,000 years to 39,000 years
old, and, that being the case, it's a pretty fair bet that we're not
going to have to wait another 35,000 years for it to be built.

http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/2009/06/25/news_pm_flute0625+Z.jpg

Comprende? ):-P

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 4:17 am
From: Kennedy McEwen

In article
<5b5e581f-660e-4465-9019-94f98c07bd16@d7g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
Twibil <nowayjose6@gmail.com> writes
>On Jun 26, 11:51 pm, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> 74 years is a pretty darn good run for ANY technology, don't you think?
>>
>> > In an unrelated story, a bone flute was found not too long ago in a
>> > stone-aged German cave. It works just exactly like a modern flute
>> > except that it plays fewer notes.
>>
>> > It carbon dates to plus or minus 35,000 years.
>>
>> What, it might come from as much as 35,000 years in the future?
>
>But in reality (as you no doubt knew perfectly well) carbon dating
>cannot give you an exact date-specific age: all it can do is give you
>a *range* of dates -and that's the plus or minus.
>
>So the flute in question is *most likely* 35,000 years old, but it
>might be anywhere from (for instance) 31,000 years to 39,000 years
>old

That would be 35,000 plus or minus 4,000 years, not "plus or minus
35,000 years" of an unknown age, which could be zero.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Proud Performer
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/f5e7547338ad4134?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 1:01 am
From: "Dudley Hanks"

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/gallery/main.php?g2_itemId=130

For GDB supporters, the economic downturn has hurt everybody, including
charities. Guide Dogs for the Blind needs donations now more than ever.
Last year, the school paid out about $1.3 million in vet costs alone --
part of that was for Dima.

http://www.guidedogs.com

Also, if you would like to support my passion for art, remember you can
Paypal donations to: dhanks@blind-apertures.com

All donations very much appreciated.

Take Care, and Thanks,
Dudley

==============================================================================
TOPIC: New Olympus EP-1 beats D3 at low ISO
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ca418075fb445b10?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 1:04 am
From: Bob Larter

Charles wrote:
> "PDM" <pdcm99[deletethisbit]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:4a44ea49$1_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>> "RichA" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:c1368505-65e2-4a72-ba8a-e8a15524b500@l32g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>>> Honest! :)
>>>
>>> See what the EP-1 can do with a scene with no DR and no moving parts?
>>>
>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=32227706
>> No moving parts? What about the release button, and the lens release
>> button and all the other buttons, et al
>
> Yup. Like Rich ... no moving parts.

Especially his brain...

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Shot Seen 'Round the World
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/15107f2ca666bb2e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 2:33 am
From: "PDM"

> Football - the game we call "soccer" in the US - is a very popular
> sport in Europe. It's a great game for people with a limited
> attention span because you really don't have to know what is going on
> on the field. The players just mill around kicking the ball this way
> and that way until someone accidently kicks the ball into one of the
> nets. This often happens once or twice during a complete game.
>
> American football is a game of set plays intended to advance the ball
> in a particular direction. Because of the variety of set plays that
> can be called, this allows for some excitement during the game. In
> European football, the excitement is all concentrated at the end of
> the game when all of the fans exit the stadium though one gate and
> over each other's bodies.
>
> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

What rubbish. Of course soccer is skillful. It requires just the same amount
of pre-planning and working our plays/tactics etc as American football. You
don't understand the game. I don't particularly like either game, but if I
had a choice which to watch it would be soccer. It's more of an action game.
My game is 10 pin bowling (or was until an injury, now had to be content
with the Wii version). It's wrong of you to think of soccer as European
football; think more of the rest of the world football.

PDM

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 5:27 am
From: tony cooper

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 10:33:33 +0100, "PDM"
<pdcm99[deletethisbit]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

>> Football - the game we call "soccer" in the US - is a very popular
>> sport in Europe. It's a great game for people with a limited
>> attention span because you really don't have to know what is going on
>> on the field. The players just mill around kicking the ball this way
>> and that way until someone accidently kicks the ball into one of the
>> nets. This often happens once or twice during a complete game.
>>
>> American football is a game of set plays intended to advance the ball
>> in a particular direction. Because of the variety of set plays that
>> can be called, this allows for some excitement during the game. In
>> European football, the excitement is all concentrated at the end of
>> the game when all of the fans exit the stadium though one gate and
>> over each other's bodies.
>>
>> --
>> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
>
>What rubbish. Of course soccer is skillful. It requires just the same amount
>of pre-planning and working our plays/tactics etc as American football. You
>don't understand the game. I don't particularly like either game, but if I
>had a choice which to watch it would be soccer. It's more of an action game.
>My game is 10 pin bowling (or was until an injury, now had to be content
>with the Wii version). It's wrong of you to think of soccer as European
>football; think more of the rest of the world football.
>

Of course, you're right. European football (soccer) does employ
strategy. Here's a strategy session:

Coach: "Here's the game plan, Diego. If you get near the ball, kick
it. With your foot".

Diego: "Which way, Coach?"

Coach: "The *other* way, you idiot. Always kick it the other way.
Now get over there with the rest of the team and practice falling
down."

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79623194af1b296b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 4:02 am
From: Wolfgang Weisselberg

John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> It's takes at least 30 secs to get a real fix.
> Anything less is a guess, no matter what you call it.
> I'm done.

Yes, don't let facts confuse you, John. Don't start thinking
how a GPS receiver can produce positions faster than one every
30 seconds and how that works. And what would happen if you
recreated the circumstances for that.

-Wolfgang

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 3:59 am
From: Wolfgang Weisselberg

frank <dhssresearcher@netscape.net> wrote:

> IF you're not locking on satellite data, you're not getting a GPS fix.

All I need is enough data for postprocessing to tell me later where
the photo was taken. And that, given a certain infrastructure,
is doable in 0.2 seconds.

Of course that'll not help you if you want to do something else
with your data and thus need the position now, not later.

> I used to flight test it way back before it was available for civilian
> uses. You need 3 in the constellation to get a GPS fix.

You can get a 2D fix with 2 sats.
You might need some special gear for that, true.

> Hint: we care more about the Fulda gap than where you'd do bikini
> beauties in Rio.

Netscape cares about the Fulda gap?

-Wolfgang

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Olympus EP-1 focusing may doom it for DSLR users
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6b39aaf93aed311f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 4:34 am
From: Bob Larter

John Navas wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:17:20 -0400, Steven Wandy <swandy@si.rr.com>
> wrote in <12ba45lg13o666tigkp3tt3nfcqkhjg3tj@4ax.com>:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:50:54 -0700, John Navas
>> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Some perhaps, but better compact digitals now have very fast focusing.
>> The only ones that I have heard that have very fast focusing is the
>> two m4/3 from Panasonic.
>> ...
>
> Then you need to get out more. For example, Digital Photography Review
> said of the Panasonic DMC-FZ8, "the actual delay between pressing the
> button and the shot being taken is almost instantaneous".

Yeah, sure.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

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

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