rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en
rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Whatever happened to the "single pixel" camera idea? - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/132ae2d328416321?hl=en
* B&H - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/f568976ee611c39e?hl=en
* CHDK P&S Cameras Soar Above All Others Again - Photos From the Stratosphere -
Again - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/481ec56ed2cf8bd2?hl=en
* Anything for the Perfect Shot - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Whatever happened to the "single pixel" camera idea?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/132ae2d328416321?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 21 2009 6:58 pm
From: Robert Coe
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:43:33 +1000, daveFaktor <davefaktor@this.group> wrote:
: Rich wrote:
: > I remember reading about it a few years back.
:
: Enlarging the images was a problem!
Didn't you once claim that you had a way of doing it?
Bob
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 21 2009 7:02 pm
From: Robert Coe
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:09:27 +1200, mike <m.fee@irl.cri.replacethiswithnz>
wrote:
: In article <nead35ll5050rrq35q730s2arts3b6g9jf@4ax.com>,
: eric.stevens@sum.co.nz says...
: > On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 23:23:58 -0700 (PDT), Rich <rander3127@gmail.com>
: > wrote:
: >
: > >I remember reading about it a few years back.
: >
: >
: > Here is the result of Google search on the subject.
: > http://tinyurl.com/nfz78b
: >
: > The idea still seems to be alive and well.
: >
: I took a look at "Physics Buzz", the first link in the search. How
: the hell did they get the mandrill to sit still for 15 minutes?
They read him mind-numbing gibberish from Rich's Usenet articles.
Bob
==============================================================================
TOPIC: B&H
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/f568976ee611c39e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 21 2009 7:21 pm
From: PatM
On Jun 21, 9:10 am, retsu...@xinap.moc (Mike S.) wrote:
> Watch word wap on the URL.
>
> http://www.inc.com/magazine/20090501/why-circuit-city-failed-and-why-...
Poor customer service: can you say Verizon?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: CHDK P&S Cameras Soar Above All Others Again - Photos From the
Stratosphere - Again
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/481ec56ed2cf8bd2?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 21 2009 7:48 pm
From: Sidny@mash.com
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:58:27 -0500, P&Ss Win Again & Again
<howsthat@andyouarewho.com> wrote:
>I'm sure that you do know the mentally ill. Your post speaks volumes about
>your familiarity with their problems, by perfect example. They tend to pal
>around together or only socialize in treatment programs and support groups.
>The lesser distressed ones are probably given access to the internet until
>they start reading into things and inventing wild and outlandish beliefs
>from what they read. Then their meds are likely readjusted and they are
>given a time-out from net-access. Is that how it works for you? :-)
Well, you know a lot more about the specifics than I do... you've obviously
spent time inside. I only know what I'm told by my friends in the business.
I bet you don't even realize you are arguing about yourself!
>> never think that they have a problem, so ask yourself
>>the question, "Am I a brain-case that has to comment on other peoples choices
>>even though it doesn't affect me and is none of my business?"
>>
>>If you answer 'no' to that question, it's time to make an appointment with your
>>doctor. And if you answer 'yes', then stop the sick behavior NOW!
Since you ignored the question, you fall into group 'A'... you don't know you're
sick. But I kinda thought that...
>
>In total your post is THE perfect over-reaction! Love it! Missed one of
>your meds dosages today, is that it? It only shows the desperate insecurity
>that's going through your head, is all. Do you doubt your camera choices
>much?
Not anymore, but I do regret buying a few of the lenses I did... they become
redundant sometimes.
> Are you that insecure when someone shows you what can be done better,
>further, faster, for less than anything you've ever done before with your
>choices in life?
I'm not insecure at all, but no one has done the things you speak of...
> I'm guessing you dumped about $30,000 on DSLRs and glass
>for them and are now desperately trying to justify why you did so.
No, I "dumped" about $5000 on DSLR's and glass, and I LOVE the great photo's I'm
getting.
What I do regret is having bought a couple of 'P&S' cameras for $2500 over the
last few years, and getting the worst shit pictures I've ever seen! I regret
only getting $150 for a Minolta Dimage I paid $1500 for. I regret having shit
photos of my late Sister and Father taken on P&S crap cameras. I wish I had
better images of the past. I wish I had got a DSLR in 2000 instead of the P&S
shit.
> I've
>seen this reaction 1,000's of times when they realize how much money
>they've wasted on camera gear and never had one damn thing to show for all
>that wasted time and expense.
I agree, I wasted a fortune on P&S CRAP before I got a DSLR.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anything for the Perfect Shot
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 21 2009 11:59 pm
From: "Bill Graham"
"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:210620090236077163%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <aitr35hm4rf5mmmms81lnqc9j8mefsaues@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens
> <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> >> >There aren't any proven Mac viruses in the wild.
>> >>
>> >> That site doesn't agree with you.
>> >
>> >that's because it's wrong.
>>
>> You can't prove that.
>
> that site hasn't proved its case. there are no mac viruses in the wild.
> the only malware is what the user installs themselves. anyone can be
> tricked into installing something that isn't what it's claimed to be.
Yes. And we live in a world where 95% of everything isn't what its, "claimed
to be".
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.photo.digital"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.photo.digital+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
