rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en
rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* |AX| Re: Black silicon with 100x the sensitivity of normal silicon - 5
messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/06ab82020f4b5f3a?hl=en
* Better JPEG standard due in 2009 - 4 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/37298c446df548af?hl=en
* Pinging Stephen Bishop: Photography questions for you, ON-topic for a change
- 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7f04a0b3ecd2b9b4?hl=en
* http://www.stylishdudes.com cheap sell air max shoes, nike shoes,ugg shoes,
jordan shoes,handbag,jeans,shox shoes, - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/41821310c4f15d09?hl=en
* Adobe Photoshop CS4 Save $700 - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/8157c93d0d1d72bc?hl=en
* Palestinians Under Attack - 5 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/785f7679e18aa82a?hl=en
* Invisible watermarking - digimarc replacement - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c29c1cfa69afd8d5?hl=en
* Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ef39fca12569e5d3?hl=en
* OT: The Flat Stomach ad: Worst Photography Ever? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/aab53b1bdf37b057?hl=en
* frigging Intervalometer settings - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c8d8fae31394cbab?hl=en
* : New Mandate: Wide Open - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/8337d76e2d880788?hl=en
* New Nikon D90 - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/068048d55f19c8d3?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: |AX| Re: Black silicon with 100x the sensitivity of normal silicon
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/06ab82020f4b5f3a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:06 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)
In article <b5Yil.16192$yr3.5550@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote:
>Mark F wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 13:29:54 +0100, Alfred Molon
>> <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Apparently a new material has been developed which has 100 times the
>>> sensitivity of standard silicon (sorry article in German only):
>>>
>>> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Schwarzes-Silizium-Sensor-Material-der-
>>> Zukunft--/meldung/126940
>> The material is from SiOnyx, which is evidentially a company in the
>> United States. See this page:
>> http://www.sionyx.com/detectors.asp
>> and the rest of the site. (I am just giving a link to an English
>> language site that discusses the material - I know nothing about the
>> company itself or the materials and processes described.)
>>> Not sure what this means exactly - perhaps that future cameras will have
>>> a base ISO of 10000 and will go up to ISO 160000, 320000 or 640000?
>
>This is kind of a venture capital marketing ad but:
>http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2008/10/12/sionyx-brings-black-silicon-into-the-l
>ight-material-could-upend-solar-imaging-industries/
>
>"But [solar power is] the "long shot" application for the material,
>Metcalfe acknowledges. Closer in is the possibility of major sensitivity
>improvements in imaging applications such as night vision, surveillance,
>digital cameras, and medical imaging. Saylor says that the company has
>negotiated strategic partnerships with two "industry leaders," and
>though he won't name names, he says one of them is active in the medical
>imaging area."
>
Certainly medical imaging could benefit. The problem other than sensitivity,
is array sizes and speed. Too much data screws everything up. What,
with nano dots and flares, we got some crazy stuff going.
greg
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:14 am
From: Don Stauffer
Alfred Molon wrote:
> Apparently a new material has been developed which has 100 times the
> sensitivity of standard silicon (sorry article in German only):
>
> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Schwarzes-Silizium-Sensor-Material-der-
> Zukunft--/meldung/126940
>
> Not sure what this means exactly - perhaps that future cameras will have
> a base ISO of 10000 and will go up to ISO 160000, 320000 or 640000?
I think silicon already has a quantum efficiency of better than 30%.
Seems to me the maximum sensitivity possible could only be three times that.
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 8:15 am
From: Alfred Molon
In article <498c53be$0$33218$815e3792@news.qwest.net>, Don Stauffer
says...
> Alfred Molon wrote:
> > Apparently a new material has been developed which has 100 times the
> > sensitivity of standard silicon (sorry article in German only):
> >
> > http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Schwarzes-Silizium-Sensor-Material-der-
> > Zukunft--/meldung/126940
> >
> > Not sure what this means exactly - perhaps that future cameras will have
> > a base ISO of 10000 and will go up to ISO 160000, 320000 or 640000?
>
>
> I think silicon already has a quantum efficiency of better than 30%.
> Seems to me the maximum sensitivity possible could only be three times that.
Well, this graph
http://1.2.3.9/bmi/www.heise.de/bilder/126940/0/1
shows an improvement in responsivity (A/W) of about 100 with respect to
standard silicon. The vertical scale is logarythmic.
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0, E30 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 8:25 am
From: "J. Clarke"
GregS wrote:
> In article <b5Yil.16192$yr3.5550@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>, Paul Furman
> <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote:
>> Mark F wrote:
>>> On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 13:29:54 +0100, Alfred Molon
>>> <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Apparently a new material has been developed which has 100 times
>>>> the sensitivity of standard silicon (sorry article in German
>>>> only):
>>>>
>>>> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Schwarzes-Silizium-Sensor-Material-der-
>>>> Zukunft--/meldung/126940
>>> The material is from SiOnyx, which is evidentially a company in
>>> the
>>> United States. See this page:
>>> http://www.sionyx.com/detectors.asp
>>> and the rest of the site. (I am just giving a link to an English
>>> language site that discusses the material - I know nothing about
>>> the
>>> company itself or the materials and processes described.)
>>>> Not sure what this means exactly - perhaps that future cameras
>>>> will have a base ISO of 10000 and will go up to ISO 160000,
>>>> 320000
>>>> or 640000?
>>
>> This is kind of a venture capital marketing ad but:
>> http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2008/10/12/sionyx-brings-black-silicon-into-the-l
>> ight-material-could-upend-solar-imaging-industries/
>>
>> "But [solar power is] the "long shot" application for the material,
>> Metcalfe acknowledges. Closer in is the possibility of major
>> sensitivity improvements in imaging applications such as night
>> vision, surveillance, digital cameras, and medical imaging. Saylor
>> says that the company has negotiated strategic partnerships with
>> two
>> "industry leaders," and though he won't name names, he says one of
>> them is active in the medical imaging area."
>>
>
> Certainly medical imaging could benefit. The problem other than
> sensitivity,
> is array sizes and speed. Too much data screws everything up. What,
> with nano dots and flares, we got some crazy stuff going.
Reading the fine print on their site, it looks like most of those huge
performance gains are in the infrared region, not visible.
> greg
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 9:59 am
From: Alfred Molon
In article <gmhoib0nf1@news2.newsguy.com>, J. Clarke says...
> Reading the fine print on their site, it looks like most of those huge
> performance gains are in the infrared region, not visible.
According to this graph the gains are over the entire spectrum from UV
to IR:
http://1.2.3.9/bmi/www.heise.de/bilder/126940/0/1
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0, E30 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Better JPEG standard due in 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/37298c446df548af?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:11 am
From: Don Stauffer
Alfred Molon wrote:
> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10152810-39.html?tag=TOCmoreStories.0
>
> ......
> JPEG uses 8-bit encoding that provides 256 gradations, but JPEG XR can
> use 16 bits or more for finer distinctions and more editing flexibility.
> ......
> Another advantage of JPEG XR is that it uses a more efficient
> compression algorithm that provides either twice the image quality as
> JPEG at the same file size, or half the file size for the same quality,
> according to Microsoft. And unlike JPEG, setting JPEG XR to record at
> its highest quality level loses no information to compression artifacts.
> ......
>
> But personally I have my doubts that JPEG XR will displace JPEG.
I agree. I don't know whether jpeg 2000 was better than the older jpeg
or not, but it sure didn't catch on.
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 8:30 am
From: Sheila
Don Stauffer wrote:
> Alfred Molon wrote:
>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10152810-39.html?tag=TOCmoreStories.0
>>
>> ......
>> JPEG uses 8-bit encoding that provides 256 gradations, but JPEG XR can
>> use 16 bits or more for finer distinctions and more editing
>> flexibility. ......
>> Another advantage of JPEG XR is that it uses a more efficient
>> compression algorithm that provides either twice the image quality as
>> JPEG at the same file size, or half the file size for the same
>> quality, according to Microsoft. And unlike JPEG, setting JPEG XR to
>> record at its highest quality level loses no information to
>> compression artifacts.
>> ......
>>
>> But personally I have my doubts that JPEG XR will displace JPEG.
>
> I agree. I don't know whether jpeg 2000 was better than the older jpeg
> or not, but it sure didn't catch on.
For people who have digital photos from 1999 that could be a very large
conversion. I wonder if there would be an easy conversion program
available.
--
Sheila
http://swdalton.com
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 8:36 am
From: ray
On Fri, 06 Feb 2009 13:21:15 +0100, Alfred Molon wrote:
> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10152810-39.html?tag=TOCmoreStories.0
>
> ......
> JPEG uses 8-bit encoding that provides 256 gradations, but JPEG XR can
> use 16 bits or more for finer distinctions and more editing flexibility.
> ......
> Another advantage of JPEG XR is that it uses a more efficient
> compression algorithm that provides either twice the image quality as
> JPEG at the same file size, or half the file size for the same quality,
> according to Microsoft. And unlike JPEG, setting JPEG XR to record at
> its highest quality level loses no information to compression artifacts.
> ......
>
> But personally I have my doubts that JPEG XR will displace JPEG.
I've been wondering what ever happened to JPEG2K - it seemed to have a
lot of promise.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 9:21 am
From: "J. Clarke"
ray wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Feb 2009 13:21:15 +0100, Alfred Molon wrote:
>
>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10152810-39.html?tag=TOCmoreStories.0
>>
>> ......
>> JPEG uses 8-bit encoding that provides 256 gradations, but JPEG XR
>> can use 16 bits or more for finer distinctions and more editing
>> flexibility. ......
>> Another advantage of JPEG XR is that it uses a more efficient
>> compression algorithm that provides either twice the image quality
>> as
>> JPEG at the same file size, or half the file size for the same
>> quality, according to Microsoft. And unlike JPEG, setting JPEG XR
>> to
>> record at its highest quality level loses no information to
>> compression artifacts. ......
>>
>> But personally I have my doubts that JPEG XR will displace JPEG.
>
> I've been wondering what ever happened to JPEG2K - it seemed to have
> a
> lot of promise.
It's a formally released standard supported by the major photo
editors. Microsoft is pushing JPEG XR though so that's likely going
to become the defacto standard, and so far their licensing precludes
its inclusion in anything open source until the algorithms get
clean-room reverse engineered.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Pinging Stephen Bishop: Photography questions for you, ON-topic for a
change
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7f04a0b3ecd2b9b4?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:15 am
From: "HEMI-Powered"
Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...
>>> I have an Epson Perfection V700 Photo scanner. It's a
>>> flatbed that also does film, and it does an excellent job with
>>> slides and negatives. It will scan 24 35mm negatives or
>>> slides at once at high resolution and separate them into
>>> individual jpegs.
>>>
> Several years back I bought a MicroTek film scanner. It was
> good for its day, similar to the Nikon Coolscan units at the
> time. But it was rather slow and didn't have very good dynamic
> range compared to current designs.
I've never had the opportunity to see any of these dedicated
scanners at work. A local camera store near me says that the
Coolscan is quite good although the slide feeder tends to jam. I
wasn't aware that MicroTek had a neg/slide scanner but I didn't
really look at their web site.
At the time I was first interested, maybe 4 years ago, I asked for
advice in this NG and the consensus back then was go with the
Nikon. It still seems to be well-regarded but is still pretty
pricey.
I did have a $250 dedicated scanner but besides being Gawd Awful
slow, it frequently refused to scan at all. Plus, it was a real
bear setting it's parameters to get a reasonable starting point for
a series of scans.
I recognize that some user input will always be necessary. Film is
no different than printed material scanning in that there are a LOT
of things that affect results. I also toyed with letting Ritz
Camera do the scans for me at 75 cents/each. They still have that
service. I may eventually try them to get a feel for what their
service is capable of.
Of course, a BIG problem in all of this is just culling the "good"
slides from the thousands of slides of lesser quality/interest.
About the only way I can think of to reasonably do that is to set
up my projector in my office, preview them, select the ones I want,
and do the scan either myself or through a service bureau.
Natually, some pains must be taken to label the slides so they can
go back into the right place in the original tray.
>>
> The Epson I have now seems very sharp. It will do photos and
> documents, of course, and it comes with film holders for 35mm,
> medium format and sheet film as well as for mounted slides.
>
> I've found that regardless of what brand or model you use, most
> scans of photographs require a lot of unsharp masking to restore
> the original sharpness of the picture.
Thanks for the evaluation. I imagine you're correct about
sharpening since no matter how many optical DPI one uses, there is
only so much that can be extracted digitally. Then again, we used
to view our slides via someone's projector whose lens was not too
hot, but the bright image made the slides seem to pop off the wall
or screen.
>>
>>I assume you bought this as a moderate price general scanner for
>>printed material as well as a fast and convenient way of doing
>>multiple negs and slides. What DPI(s) does it support and what
>>do you usually use? How do you perceive the overall quality to
>>be vs. a dedicate scanner like a Nikon Coolscan or similar? And,
>>does it support Digital Ice for reducing noise from dust on the
>>slides?
>
> I've never used the Nikon scanner, but this one does create some
> very nice output. It has very good dynamic range (measured as
> "D-Max"). I find I have to play with the levels control in the
> scanner software to keep from blowing out highlights, as the
> default settings seem to favor shadow detail. The max optical
> resolution is 6400 dpi, but I generally keep it at 3200 dpi to
> keep file sizes reasonable. Yes, the Epson software does
> include Digital ICE, but I rarely use it because it slows things
> down a lot. For some technical reason, it doesn't work with
> black and white film, anyway.
6400 DPI seems like WAY overkill for the level of quality I know my
old slides and negs are. That would create gigantic digital images
to try to work with. I'd more likely use around 2500 or whatever is
closest to that. If yours is 3200, I'd probably try that and might
even go down even further depending on the slide quality.
To put my own opinion of DPI into some perspective, I can comment
that I've scanned well over 500 family snapshots, which were of the
drug store variety. Trying to produce an image larger than about
1280 x 960, sometimes only 1024 x 768, is futile since the image
information just isn't in those old snap shot prints plus the film
grain starts to show up as digital noise.
Yes, I have heard that Digital ICE slows things down considerably,
which makes sense. I've also heard that it generally cannot be used
on Kodachrome slides, something to do with the emulsion type. I
know that Ritz' equipment doesn't have it and I know that all my
slides are VERY dusty, so ...
> My experience with it so far has been limited to negatives.
> I'll be digging into my color slides soon enough, but I haven't
> done enough of them on this scanner to judge how good it is for
> that purpose.
>
That's OK. There're special problems with negs because of the color
of the film mask but if your scanner has the proper film type
calibration it should be fine.
BTW, Stephen, did you get the E-mail I sent you early yesterday
morning? I assume it went through OK because I didn't get a deliver
y failure.
Thanks for the insights on film scanning.
--
HP, aka Jerry
"The government that governs least, governs best" - Thomas
Jefferson
"Government is NOT the solution to our problems, it IS our
problem!" - Ronald Reagan
==============================================================================
TOPIC: http://www.stylishdudes.com cheap sell air max shoes, nike shoes,ugg
shoes,jordan shoes,handbag,jeans,shox shoes,
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/41821310c4f15d09?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:21 am
From: "stylishdudes003@gmail.com"
Nike wholesale www.stylishdudes.com Nike shoes wholesale. Nike
shoes: Nike shox air force1 jordan TL NZ R4 Turbo Monster shoes,Nike
air max 95 360 97 2003 TN Plus shoes,Nike air jordan shoes,Nike air
dunk shoes. We sale wholesale Nike shoes(Nike trainers, Nike
sneakers,
Nike basketball shoes, Nike running shoes, Nike Men's shoes, Nike
women's shoes, Nike mens shoes, Nike womens shoes, nike cheap
discount
shoes). Nike shox shoes wholesale(Nike shox tl - shox tl 3 III, Nike
shox nz,Nike shox r4,Nike shox r5,Nike shox turbo,nike shox
monster,nike shox VC OZ Ride shoes). Nike air max shoes
wholesale(Nike
air max tn plus,Nike air max 360,Nike air max 95, Nike air max 97,
Nike air max 2003,Nike air max 2004,Nike air max 90). Nike shoes
wholesale other sport shoes(retro nike air jordan 21 XXI 11 XI 13
20,nike air dunk low min high, Nike air rift,Nike air force 1 one).
China Nike factory sale and wholesale nike shoes to your nike shop &
nike store, Nike wholesale nike shoes to United States America and
England and United Kingdom and Europe.
www.stylishdudes.com
Nike Shoes Wholesale - Nike Air Dunk: www.stylishdudes.com
Nike Dunk , Nike Dunks, Nike Air Dunk, Nike Air Dunks, Nike Dunks
Dunk
low,Nike Air Dunks Dunk High , Nike Dunk mid Shoes.
Nike Sale - Nike Air Force 1:
Nike Air Force 1, Nike Air Force one Shoes, Nike Air Force 1 one,
Nike
air force 1 one Low mid high shoes.
Nike Shoes Wholesale - Nike Air Max:
Nike Air Max Shoes, Nike airmax , Nike Air Max tn, Nike Air Max plus,
Nike Air Max 90 , Nike Air Max 360 , Nike Air Max 95, Nike Air Max
97,
Nike Air Max 2003, Nike Air Max 2004 , Nike Air Max 2005.
Nike Wholesale - Nike Shox:
Nike Shox Shoes, Nike shocks Shoes, Nike Shox tl Shoes,Nike Shox
nz ,Nike Shox r4 , Nike Shox r5, Nike Shox turbo, Nike Shox tl 2 II,
Nike Shox tl 3 III, Nike Shox monster, Nike Shox running Shoes, Nike
Shox LV, Nike Shox BURBERRY.
Nike Shoes Wholesale - Nike Air Jordan shoes:
Nike Jordan, Nike Jordans, Nike Air Jordan, Nike Air Jordans, Nike
Air
Jordan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21, Nike Air
Jordan 11 XI, Nike Air Jordan 13 XIII, Nike Air Jordan 21 XXI.
Nike rift, Nike Air rift at www.stylishdudes.com
We also Wholesale Puma Shoes, timberland Shoes, timberland boots,
adidas Shoes, bathing ape Shoes, bape sta Shoes,Bape sta Shoes, Prada
Shoes, Prada Boots, Reebok Shoes.
Nike Air retro Jordan, Retro, Mart, trading company, Limited Nike
Wholesale,retailer, sales, selle & trader &e saler, Nike website,
www.stylishdudes.com
Nike com, Nike products,Nike Shox xt,Nike tailwind,Nike marketing,
Nike factory store, Nike classic, Buy Nike Shoes,Nike Shoes
online,Nike walking Shoes,Nike sport Shoes, Nike skate Shoes, retro
Nike Shoes, Nike training Shoes,Nike kids Shoes,discontinued Nike
Shoes,Nike Shoes for kids, Nike new Shoes,fake Nike Shoes, customs
Nike Shoes,copy Nike Shoes,replica Shoes, baby Nike Shoes, Nike
AirForce 1 Shoes, Nike Shoes catalog,Nike Shoes models,newest Nike
Shoes, Nike gucci Shoes,Nike Air Force 2 Shoes,Nike Shoes picture.
www.stylishdudes.com
Nike Shoes Wholesale - Nike Air Dunk:
Nike Dunk , Nike Dunks, Nike Air Dunk, Nike Air Dunks, Nike Dunks
Dunk
low,Nike Air Dunks Dunk High , Nike Dunk mid Shoes.
Nike Sale - Nike Air Force 1:
Nike Air Force 1, Nike Air Force one Shoes, Nike Air Force 1 one,
Nike
air force 1 one Low mid high shoes.
Nike Shoes Wholesale - Nike Air Max:
Nike Air Max Shoes, Nike airmax , Nike Air Max tn, Nike Air Max plus,
Nike Air Max 90 , Nike Air Max 360 , Nike Air Max 95, Nike Air Max
97,
Nike Air Max 2003, Nike Air Max 2004 , Nike Air Max 2005.
Nike Wholesale - Nike Shox: www.stylishdudes.com
Nike Shox Shoes, Nike shocks Shoes, Nike Shox tl Shoes,Nike Shox
nz ,Nike Shox r4 , Nike Shox r5, Nike Shox turbo, Nike Shox tl 2 II,
Nike Shox tl 3 III, Nike Shox monster, Nike Shox running Shoes, Nike
Shox LV, Nike Shox BURBERRY.
Nike Shoes Wholesale - Nike Air Jordan shoes:
Nike Jordan, Nike Jordans, Nike Air Jordan, Nike Air Jordans, Nike
Air
Jordan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21, Nike Air
Jordan 11 XI, Nike Air Jordan 13 XIII, Nike Air Jordan 21 XXI.
Nike rift, Nike Air rift,
We also Wholesale Puma Shoes, timberland Shoes, timberland boots,
adidas Shoes, bathing ape Shoes, bape sta Shoes,Bape sta Shoes, Prada
Shoes, Prada Boots, Reebok Shoes.
Nike Air retro Jordan, Retro, Mart, trading company, Limited Nike
Wholesale,retailer, sales, selle & trader &e saler, Nike website,
www.stylishdudes.com
Nike com, Nike products,Nike Shox xt,Nike tailwind,Nike marketing,
Nike factory store, Nike classic, Buy Nike Shoes,Nike Shoes
online,Nike walking Shoes,Nike sport Shoes, Nike skate Shoes, retro
Nike Shoes, Nike training Shoes,Nike kids Shoes,discontinued Nike
Shoes,Nike Shoes for kids, Nike new Shoes,fake Nike Shoes, customs
Nike Shoes,copy Nike Shoes,replica Shoes, baby Nike Shoes, Nike
AirForce 1 Shoes, Nike Shoes catalog,Nike Shoes models,newest Nike
Shoes, Nike gucci Shoes,Nike Air Force 2 Shoes,Nike Shoes picture.
Lake Shoes Industry Limit is Nike Shoes Wholesale company, A china
Nike customs Shoes Wholesale design company, we Wholesale Nike Shoes
from our Nike factory to Nike shop & Nike store, sale and Wholesale
all of Nike stock Shoes, we have many type of Nike Shoes : Nike
discount Shoes, Nike cheap Shoes, Nike stock Shoes (Nike Trainers,
Nike Sneakers, Nike Running Shoes, Nike Basketball Shoes,Nike
Discount
Shoes,Nike Cheap Shoes, footwear, Sports Shoes )
Nike Shoes Wholesale sizes include: Nike men's Shoes, Nike women's
Shoes, Nike mens Shoes, Nike womens Shoes, Nike men Shoes, Nike women
Shoes, Nike kids Shoes, Nike child Shoes.
Nike discount Shoes, Nike cheap Shoes, china Nike Shoes.
The color of Nike Shoes Wholesale: www.stylishdudes.com
White, Bule, Gold, Golden, Yellow, Pink, Black, Silver, purple,
oragle , Green, Brown, Grey, beige, darkish, fawn, buff, powder blue,
celandine green, French grey, grayish, pearl blue, azury, aqua, baby
pink, laurel green, lilac, puce, atrous, carmine, navy blue, olive-
drab, bottle green, claret, modena, nut-brown
website:www.stylishdudes.com
E-mail: stylishdudes@gmail.com
We Import & Export & Trading & Retail & sell & buy & distribution &
Wholesale Nike footwear and Nike Shoes to this market:
USA, America,US,United States,UK,England, United Kingdom, IT,Italy,
NT, Netherlands,China, Chinese, Germany, DE, Greece,GR, France,
FR,Spain,Portugal,Switzerland,Switzerland,Brazil,Chile,Peru,Canada,
Japan, Korea,Australia,Hongkong, Canada, Mexico, Etc.. all over the
world.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Adobe Photoshop CS4 Save $700
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/8157c93d0d1d72bc?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:24 am
From: tony cooper
On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 15:05:11 -0000, "whisky-dave"
<whisky-dave@final.front.ear> wrote:
>
>"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:gmhfpd010fn@news4.newsguy.com...
>> whisky-dave wrote:
>
>
>>> I know I work at a university, you do know that the license only
>>> aplpies to students,
>>> you have no right to use that software once you leave education i.e
>>> only studetns can use the software remmebr you brought a license to
>>> use photoshop,
>>> you did NOT buy photoshop. ;-)
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Anyone can do this. A community college course is usually under
>>>> $100. That qualifies the person for the student price. It can be
>>>> any course on any subject.
>>>
>>> But you can only use this purchase while studying, you should
>>> upgrade
>>> your license if you're no longer a student.
>>
>> Should yes, and it generally happens that if the ex student is
>> actually using the product to make a living this happens at the first
>> upgrade of the software.
>
>I'm not sure how this follows, how does the product know it's not been used
>for educational purposes ?
>
>>
>>> IIRC our univ. students are meant to delete all such products they
>>> have purchased
>>> under such a scheme when they leave education,
>>
>> Adobe has two programs, student _licensing_ and student _editions_.
>> Student licensing is administered by the university or their
>> designated agent and the university remains the licensee,
>
>yes, that's what we use I believe although it's some time since it was my
>job
>as software auditor. :)
>
>> student
>> editions are discounted retail-boxed products licensed to the
>> purchaser. Quite frankly it is none of the school's damned business
>> what is done with student editions. Student licenses however are the
>> school's business.
>Which is why we have to "re-claim" the software in order to re-issue it to
>the next student.
>
>> Nothing in the student edition license says that the student edition
>> must be deleted on graduation--while one can make a legal case that
>> that's the intent nothing in the promotional materials suggests that
>> one is expected to do so.
>Haven't read any the EULs recently for the student editions.
>I remember having to break the seal therefore agreeing to the terms before I
>read them. :-(
>but that was a while ago.
>
>>> as they are meant to
>>> be used for
>>> educational purpuses only which is in the licence agreement[1]
>>> Strange how Adobe[2] can accept such losses on their products for
>>> educational use isn't it. ;-)
>>
>> It's called "seed money". The student of today is the studio head of
>> tomorrow. There is no statement in the Adobe general license that the
>> product must be used for "educational purposes", only that the
>> purchaser meet the stated requirements.
>
>They are interestingly worded, I wonder what happens if you're not the
>purchaser.
>
>>> Even Apple gives discounts on hardware if you are a student or work
>>> in
>>> teaching.
>>>
>>> Now whay should these companies do this ?
>>
>> Get 'em hooked while they're young of course.
>
>Yep, I got hooked on PS with my first 'borrowed copy'
>Anyone that's working in the field of photomanipulation/editing I recommend
>PS,
>because I know a bit about it. I don't tend to recommend things I haven't
>used.
>So that's 3 copies 'my students' have brought for their work enviroment,
>managment thought Word pic was good enough ......
>
>
>>> [1] also used to help cure those suffering from insomnia ;-)
>>> [2] I think microsoft have similar deals/agreements/licenses.
>>
>> Most major software publishers have student pricing. Microsoft has
>> retail boxed product on the shelf at Staples intended for student
>> use--for purchase you have to present a valid student ID.
>>
>> Note by the way that there are also heavy discounts for nonprofits.
>
>I've never actually seen those, but it still interests me the idea of theft
>as
>an accurate description which was my original point.
>I donlt even know how many computers you can install a product on,
>if I had a laptop and a desktop I can't see why installing one product on
>both
>should be considered me stealing one copy.
>
>As an example I have a fully legal copy office on the PC at work,
>last I heard it was OK for me to copy that to a laptop PC but not a Mac,
>I should by another copy, which to me seems a little unfair descrimination
>I call it, if only my Mac was black ;-)
>
Most of the questions above can be answered by simply reading the
Adobe End User License Agreement. That's available to read at
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/psase_license.html
I am somewhat shocked that a person who had the responsibility of
being the software auditor of a university doesn't know how to find a
copy of the EULA and makes statements that are contradicted by the
EULA. It's like the Safety Officer of a company not being able to
find a MSDS on a chemical used by the company.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:49 am
From: John McWilliams
tony cooper wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 15:05:11 -0000, "whisky-dave"
> <whisky-dave@final.front.ear> wrote:
>>
>> As an example I have a fully legal copy office on the PC at work,
>> last I heard it was OK for me to copy that to a laptop PC but not a Mac,
>> I should by another copy, which to me seems a little unfair descrimination
>> I call it, if only my Mac was black ;-)
>>
> Most of the questions above can be answered by simply reading the
> Adobe End User License Agreement. That's available to read at
> http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/psase_license.html
>
> I am somewhat shocked that a person who had the responsibility of
> being the software auditor of a university doesn't know how to find a
> copy of the EULA and makes statements that are contradicted by the
> EULA. It's like the Safety Officer of a company not being able to
> find a MSDS on a chemical used by the company.
Quite right, 'ceptin' this is usenet and all.....
--
john mcwilliams
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Palestinians Under Attack
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/785f7679e18aa82a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:30 am
From: "HEMI-Powered"
Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...
>>If you like O'Reilly, you like hearing your own views echoed and
>>dislike hearing any balancing information that more accurately
>>portrays what we call news.
>>
>>The hard core O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and Hannity listeners are like
>>baby birds. They want their mind food brought to them by
>>someone else and pre-digested and fed to them.
>
> To be fair, Tony, the above statement also applies to those who
> get their information from sources like MSNBC, the BBC, NPR and
> the major news networks.
The nature of political talk show hosts on either TV or radio is
such that they DO have a bias and an agenda and thus maintain an
audience that likes their viewpoint. That's why I watch Left,
Right, and Center cable news shows to try to at least get the full
gamut of "facts" but it CAN be tough. In short, just like watching
Congress in session on C-SPAN, it can be VERY tough to see that
various people are actually talking about the same things, their
slant/spin is SO extremely different.
I watched Chris Mathew, Keith Oberman, and Rachel Maddow last night
and the night before alone with Lou Dobbs, Glenn Beck, O'Reilly,
Sean Hannity and the day time cable news hosts, because I wanted to
hear what each was saying about the stimulus plan debate then going
on in the Senate.
Just as I expected, the MSNBC crowd took the low road in
criticizing the Republicans as being obstructionist while at the
same time defending President Obama's "tough talk." It is QUITE
obvious that these clowns just haven't read even a summary of the
bill OR they are just partisan stooges. In this particular debate,
it is refreshing to listen to Fox and even CNN/CNN Headlines
because it appears that they HAVE read and understood the House and
Senate bills.
As to feeding baby birds, that is more an indictment or accusation
that viewers are too stupid to recognize truth and separate it from
bias reporting and spin. I find that to be the most egegious aspect
of the typical Liberal response to ANY political debate. They just
want to shout down and stiffle dissent from even centrist
commentators, much less those evil people on the Right.
> Rush is first and foremost an entertainer, and he acknowledges
> this. He is very good at what he does because he keeps tripping
> up liberals into making him the issue rather than whatever topic
> is at hand. Most people who listen to him or Hannity don't
> follow their every word as gospel, but rather appreciate that
> what they hear provides a good balance to the liberal glop that
> can be found from other "mainstream" sources.
>
He is a good entertainer and listeners should know and understand
that he comes with a STRONG agenda. As for tripping up the
liberals, it is about as easy to do that as it is for them to trip
up those conservatives who are bobble-headed ideologues. It truly
astounds, flummoxes, and saddans me that our elected officials seem
FAR more interested in advancing THEIR agendas and that of their
party instead of doing the bidding of the American people.
WRT the stimulus package, I think it is going to die a cruel-but-
deserved death in it's present form. Right now, CNN, Fox, AND MSNBC
are saying that over 25,000 phone calls and a like number of E-
mails is coming into Congress PER DAY! I say, great!
Obama tried to belittle the Red Team at his party's lavish retreat
last night by saying that he inherited the mess. Sorry to say this,
Mr. President, but YOU were one of the Senators that approved of
the Treasury's TARP bill. I DO want Obama to succeed in helping our
country out of this economic malaise but NOT because I like him or
his policies. He has ONLY one chance at this, else it will be
Obama's Depression by spring.
Likewise, President Obama's entire foreign policy agenda including
winding down Iraq, expanding the war in Afghanistan, trying to
mediate the Israeli/Hamas mini-war, Iran, etc. will VERY quickly
transpose criticism by the Far Left Loons that this is George
Bush's failure IF by later this year things are just as bad. It
wasn't so much that the American people hated Bush per se, they
hated his policies and actions. So, if Obama cannot truly make
"change we can believe in" then HE will quite quickly get the
unwanted mantra of this being Obama's War. Interesting also was
Obama noting in a short speech yesterday that he understood that he
HAD to get the economy right and quickly else he KNOWS he'd be a
one term president. Ya think?!
--
HP, aka Jerry
"The government that governs least, governs best" - Thomas
Jefferson
"Government is NOT the solution to our problems, it IS our
problem!" - Ronald Reagan
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:35 am
From: "HEMI-Powered"
Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...
>>I doubt anyone will believe me when I say this, but I DO think
>>that Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity ARE highly
>>biased in a great many areas. It is VERY apparent in what they
>>talk about with their guests, the kind of questions they ask and
>>how they ask them, and their own style of veiled spin. That
>>said, at least it is obvious when they stray from the correct
>>message. OTOH, MSNBC's Chris Mathew, Keith Oberman, and Rachel
>>Maddow plus a few others NEVER let up on the Far Left Loon/Green
>>Nazi/I Hate Republican line to even present opposing
>>viewpoints.
>
> The difference that most people miss is that guys like Hannity
> and Rush very openly admit their conservative viewpoint, while
> the airbags on the other side pretend that what they spew is
> fair and neutral.
>
You are so right here! Actually, that is the MAIN difference
between Liberals and Conservatives in general - the Liberals almost
always resort to disparaging the Conservatives in a vain attempt to
distract the American people.
Again, Hannity IS biased to the right, O'Reilly IS biased, Beck IS
biased, but like you say, they do not mince words about where there
feelings lie, they bring BOTH points of view to their nightly TV
shows, and I think they show opposing views a great amount of
respect, contrary to the Left.
>>Which is why the Left is trying to restart the Fairness Doctrine
>>again and why it is promoting card check to attempt to
>>streamline unionization of industry and business. When it became
>>apparent many years ago that these two things were NOT how
>>mainstream America views them, it became ultra important to make
>>it LOOK like the Left and it's media stooges were for free
>>speech and free union elections when what they REALLY are for is
>>POWER - power to run OUR lives and spend OUR money. If what
>>people want is a nanny state, welcome to the New Order!
>
> If something like the "fairness doctrine" were to ever be
> implemented, I would be amazed at how liberals could look
> themselves in the mirror and pretend that they are advocates of
> free speech or any other part of the Bill of Rights.
>
Did you see the details of the Liberal version of SCHIP?
"Children" are defined as - are you ready for this? - up to age 30!
And, the poverty level for eligibility in SCHIP has been raised to
$70,000/year plus ALL children of illegal aliens are fully covered!
This is very transparently the first shots fired in a mandatory
national healthcare system. What makes the new SCHIP so ludicrous
is that to pay for it in the short-term, the Administration
actually needs 26,000 NEW cigarette smokers to start smoking!
Puleeze!
--
HP, aka Jerry
"The government that governs least, governs best" - Thomas
Jefferson
"Government is NOT the solution to our problems, it IS our
problem!" - Ronald Reagan
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:45 am
From: "HEMI-Powered"
Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...
>>Do you -for instance- see right-wing commentators frequently
>>speaking of Bill Clinton with great respect?
>
> The difference is that Clinton was actually caught lying and
> obstructing justice, and he was impeached for it. He was also
> disbarred. Quite honestly he's lucky to not be in prison.
I've always like him looking so serious on prime-time TV with "I
did NOT have sexual relations with that woman!" then admitting just
2 weeks later that he had, a number of times.
> Clinton is also justly criticized for his failure to properly
> deal with terrorists during his administration, which directly
> led to the 9/11 attacks.
>
> OTOH, most of the anti-Bush rhetoric is blind hatred and
> irrational shrillness.
>
See one of my other replies. In the beginning, I doubt many hated
George W. Bush. After all, his handling of the post-9/11 situation
was widely lauded and his approval ratings soared for a time. He
fell out of favor in starting a war in Iraq that not only killed
and maimed our military people but also led to the massive
deficits. It was NOT the tax cuts that caused the deficits, it was
the War On Terror. And, it was NOT a tax cut for the rich. Easy
example: since 80%+ of ALL Americans own market securities directly
or indirectly through their pension plans, cutting cap gains to 15%
helped 80%+ of ALL taxpayers. Don't hear the Liberals talk about
that either.
Then, too, there's the accusation that Bush squandered the Clinton
prosperity and budget surplus except that the FACTS show that the
economy was going soft even during the 2000 election mainly by the
dot.com bubble bursting. The country would likely have gone into
recession anyway but even a Liberal in office would NOT have likely
correctly anticipated the World Trade Center attack.
>>
>>> What I find positively fascinating and highly amusing is that
>>> Oberman and Maddow NOW are completely disenchanted with the
>>> new president NOT because he's a bad guy but because he
>>> apparently is Left enough!
>>
>>Well, no, you missed it clean: it's their *job* to point out
>>screw-ups on the part of whoever's in power, and for the next
>>four years that's going to be Obama. (This means you can expect
>>them to continue pointing it out whenever they can catch him at
>>anything embarassing, and this *should* make you very happy.)
>
> Come back and tell us when Olberman starts shouting and raving
> about Obama with the same shrillness and vigor that he does
> about Bush.
Oberman and Maddow are now caught in a cosmic dilemma: one the one
hand, they LOVE a Far Left Loon and Green Nazi in the White House
and the Liberals with a strangle hold on Congress, but so far,
Obama appears NOT to be fulfilling THEIR view on the issues. So,
what amuses me so much is exactly what I said yesterday - these two
twits don't know whether to hunt or fetch just yet.
>
>>> I doubt anyone will believe me when I say this, but I DO think
>>> that Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity ARE highly
>>> biased in a great many areas.
>>
>>Gee, you think?
>
> Those who are most critical of those guys tend not to listen to
> them, but rely on soundbites and on what others say to judge
> them. If you really listen, you'll understand that they openly
> acknowledge their conservative points of view. They are very
> honest about it, unlike the liberals in media who pretend that
> their views are fair and even.
>
O'Reilly had Ted Turner, a certifiable Loon, on his show before
Christmas. Turner ADMITTED he never watched the Factor nor ever
watches Fox. O'Reilly correctly said "then, Mr. Turner, I suggest
that you watch our show before you make incorrect critical
statements about us." or words to that effect. Says it all, I
think.
>
>>Hmmm. Looks as if something over 50% of the electorate wanted it
>>more than they wanted the alternative that was being presented.
>
> Let's just see how quickly those over-50% get disillusioned and
> start expressing buyer's remorse. Obama's approval ratings are
> already falling now that the voters are seeing that this
> "stimulus package" he is pushing so hard is nothing but an
> excuse to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on pet projects of
> the democrats in congress.
The elections' popular vote was a little over 52% for Obama and a
little over 46% for McCain. The Electoral College tally, though,
was 365 to 165, a "landslide" showing the foolishness of continuing
that system.
--
HP, aka Jerry
"The government that governs least, governs best" - Thomas
Jefferson
"Government is NOT the solution to our problems, it IS our
problem!" - Ronald Reagan
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 9:06 am
From: SMS
HEMI-Powered wrote:
> Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
> jour ...
>
>>> Do you -for instance- see right-wing commentators frequently
>>> speaking of Bill Clinton with great respect?
>> The difference is that Clinton was actually caught lying and
>> obstructing justice, and he was impeached for it. He was also
>> disbarred. Quite honestly he's lucky to not be in prison.
>
> I've always like him looking so serious on prime-time TV with "I
> did NOT have sexual relations with that woman!" then admitting just
> 2 weeks later that he had, a number of times.
He never admitted it. His definition of sexual relations was
intercourse, and that didn't happen.
I find it amusing that the neo-cons continue to harp on this minor
indiscretion of Clinton while ignoring the incredible damage Bush was
responsible for, including turning a surplus into the largest deficits
in history, causing the worst recession since the depression (and now
finally economists are starting to use the D word instead of the R
word), and causing the 9-11 attacks by ignoring the information that the
outgoing Clinton administration gave them.
Anyway, it seems like Obama has been able to calm the situation in the
liberated territories. Rocket attacks by Hamas are way down, so the
retaliations by Israel have also decreased. Israel now seems intent on
targeting the tunnels used to smuggle weapons into Gaza from Israel.
This may be the best we can hope for until Hamas is overthrown from within.
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 10:11 am
From: Chris H
In message <H5_il.13090$as4.7594@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> writes
>HEMI-Powered wrote:
>> Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
>> jour ...
>>>> Do you -for instance- see right-wing commentators frequently
>>>> speaking of Bill Clinton with great respect?
>>> The difference is that Clinton was actually caught lying and
>>> obstructing justice, and he was impeached for it. He was also
>>> disbarred. Quite honestly he's lucky to not be in prison.
>> I've always like him looking so serious on prime-time TV with "I
>>did NOT have sexual relations with that woman!" then admitting just 2
>>weeks later that he had, a number of times.
>
>He never admitted it. His definition of sexual relations was
>intercourse, and that didn't happen.
>
>I find it amusing that the neo-cons continue to harp on this minor
>indiscretion of Clinton
As the French President said " Just the ONE Mistress.....?" :-)
Personally I think he should have said "Yes.... so what? " It has
nothing to do with his capabilities as a politician.
>while ignoring the incredible damage Bush was responsible for,
>including turning a surplus into the largest deficits in history,
>causing the worst recession since the depression (and now finally
>economists are starting to use the D word instead of the R word), and
>causing the 9-11 attacks by ignoring the information that the outgoing
>Clinton administration gave them.
Not to mention flouting international Law., pissing off all the USA's
friends.
>Anyway, it seems like Obama has been able to calm the situation in the
>liberated territories. Rocket attacks by Hamas are way down, so the
>retaliations by Israel have also decreased. Israel now seems intent on
>targeting the tunnels used to smuggle weapons into Gaza from Israel.
Not sure this is all down to Obama.
>This may be the best we can hope for until Hamas is overthrown from
>within.
Or better still Israel removed altogether.
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Invisible watermarking - digimarc replacement
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c29c1cfa69afd8d5?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:51 am
From: filip.krolupper@gmail.com
Hi there. I wanted to sign my photos to protect them from stealing.
Digimarc was the only option, but it is sooooo expensive. I've decided
to program my own tool. Its name is SignMyImage and it can do all the
job as Digimarc for photos. Its shareware/freeware ... depends. if
interested check it www.adptools.com Filip
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ef39fca12569e5d3?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 7:58 am
From: C J Campbell @hotmail.com>
On 2009-02-05 20:05:27 -0800, Pat <groups@artisticphotography.us> said:
> On Feb 5, 11:36 am, C J Campbell <christophercampb...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 2009-02-04 15:39:05 -0800, Pat <gro...@artisticphotography.us> said:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 4, 5:27 pm, C J Campbell <christophercampb...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 2009-02-04 10:59:04 -0800, Pat <gro...@artisticphotography.us> said
> :
>>
>>>>> On Feb 3, 3:35 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>> Mr.T <MrT@home> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Sir John Howard" <sirjohnhow...@gmail.con> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a til
> t/
>>> s
>>>>> hift
>>>>>>>>> lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that
> i
>>> n
>>>>>>>>> Photoshop with a single image.
>>
>>>>>>>> A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens a
> pe
>>> rt
>>>>> ure
>>>>>>>> controls depth of field.
>>
>>>>>>> Partly true, a simple tilt-shift lens is not a complete substitute
> fo
>>> r a
>>>>>>> full view camera with tilting film back and lensboard which DO allo
> w
>>> the
>>>>>>> depth of field to be non parallel to the film/image plane.
>>>>>>> And you cannot do that with lens aperture alone.
>>
>>>>>> I've taken photos that had subjects from six inches to infinity, and
>>>>>> even at f22 it's hard to get everything to be sharp. Of course, T
> S
>>>>>> lenses tend to be too expensive for the occasional need.
>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Ray Fischer
>>>>>> rfisc...@sonic.net
>>
>>>>> There is software to handle the extended depth of field. You take
> a
>>>>> series of pictures and merge them. Say you start by focusing 6 inc
> he
>>> s
>>>>> out. Then if your DOF ends at 12", you take another picture and fo
> cu
>>> s
>>>>> 8 inches out. If your DOF then ends at 16", your next picture is a
> t
>>>>> 12" or so. You then merge the photos together and get one picture
>>>>> with extended DOF. I've never used the software but I've read
>>>>> articles about it and it's pretty slick (and easy).
>>
>>>>> It is the same concept of bracketing exposures and blending the image
> s
>>>>> to give a larger dynamic range.
>>
>>>> Sure, but it is not always possible to take multiple exposures so that
>>>> you can merge them together.
>>
>>>> After all, you can take two exposures and effectively double the pixel
> s
>>>> in your camera, too. So why bother getting a 24 megapixel camera when
>>>> you can get nearly the same resolution with two 12 megapixel exposures
> ?
>>>> Maybe the bride won't sit still?
>>
>>>> --
>>>> Waddling Eagle
>>>> World Famous Flight Instructor
>>
>>> Actually, if you took 10 images where you did nothing except changed
>>> the focus and you merge them together, you'd still have your original
>>> resolution. You wouldn't be gaining any information, you'd just be
>>> making sure that all of it was in focus.
>>
>> I said nothing about changing focus.
>>
>> As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left
>> a half a pixel for the second shot. :-)
>>
>> --
>> Waddling Eagle
>> World Famous Flight Instructor
>
> I don't think you understood my 1st post re multiple exposures. You
> take multiple exposures but don't move the camera -- just move the
> focal point. That, obviously, changes what's in focus. My merging
> the photos in much same way you would merge photos for a high-dynamic-
> range photo; you can get a photo with a huge depth of field (which is
> what the thread was about). It was not about merging to make a
> panoramic or something.
No, Pat. We all know about this technique. I use it most often in macro shots.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor
==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT: The Flat Stomach ad: Worst Photography Ever?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/aab53b1bdf37b057?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 8:04 am
From: C J Campbell @hotmail.com>
On 2009-02-05 21:27:09 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck@savage.net> said:
> On 2009-02-05 07:58:40 -0800, C J Campbell
> <christophercampbell@hotmail.com> said:
>
>> The "One rule for a flat stomach" ad turns my stomach for sure. The
>> before and after shots are horrible.
>>
>> Worse, this ad seems to appear on practically every page on the web,
>> sometimes two or three times. There has to be some way of blocking this
>> obnoxious thing using Safari on a Mac.
>
> Try PithHelmet http://www.culater.net/software/PithHelmet/PithHelmet.php
Thanks. PithHelmet seems to get the most favorable reviews. I'll give it a try.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor
==============================================================================
TOPIC: frigging Intervalometer settings
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c8d8fae31394cbab?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 8:26 am
From: "whisky-dave"
I used this setting on my canon S70, but have heard they dropped this
function on the G series,
is there any way of achieving this type of function on a G9 or G10 perhaps
CHDK on the G9 but I don;t think you can do that with the G10, or are there
any other ways of getting this type of functionality, I'm considering
building an external trigger, but securely sticking it to the camera might
be my biggest hurdle.
I've heard you can use USB but couldn't find the options with the canon
software supplied.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: : New Mandate: Wide Open
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/8337d76e2d880788?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 9:38 am
From: Annika1980
The temptation to go to the archives is strong on this one.
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/73513103
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/75506014
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/80785628
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/103821333
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/1537800
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/83251452
==============================================================================
TOPIC: New Nikon D90
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/068048d55f19c8d3?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 10:00 am
From: measekite
Just announced and on paper the new Nikon D90 appears to have jumped ahead
of the new (now shipping) Canon SX10.
However, in the past Nikon's P&S and Long Zoom EVRs (Electronic
Viewfinders) have not been as good in so far as image quality and color
quality and have had shutter lag issues on most models.
If those problems are resolved and the image and color quality is as good
as Canon along with the balance between noise and detail then finally
Nikon may have a winner.
I am looking forward to a bunch of reviews. So far no ship date has been
announced that I read so I expect this will be by summer.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Feb 6 2009 10:11 am
From: SMS
measekite wrote:
> Just announced and on paper the new Nikon D90 appears to have jumped ahead
> of the new (now shipping) Canon SX10.
Huh?
==============================================================================
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
![http://img83.imageshack.us/my.php?image=selectionproblemcr3.gif][IMG]http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/5968/selectionproblemcr3.th.gif[/IMG][/URL](http://img83.imageshack.us/my.php?image=selectionproblemcr3.gif][IMG]http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/5968/selectionproblemcr3.th.gif[/IMG][/URL){kind=link}