Whiskers wrote:

On 2008-01-19, Blinky the Shark wrote:
Whiskers wrote:

On 2008-01-18, Blinky the Shark wrote:
Whiskers wrote:

On 2008-01-17, Blinky the Shark wrote:

I confess I didn't look at Samsung. But I did get a 24" 1920x1200
Samsung monitor last month. I'm a *fan* of Samsung, but......I don't
think of them when I think "camera". Ditto Panasonic and Sony;
didn't look at them. I come from the '60s (as do my film
camerasg), when (of the brands still around!) there was Nikon,
Minolta, Mamiya, Pentax, Contax, Ricoh, Leica, Hasselblad, etc. (My
film cameras are a Pentax 35 and a Mamiya 6x6.)

I've sometimes yearned for a C330 outfit - but I think 'large format'
will get to me eventually. I like the contemplative approach, and the
ability to exploit 'movements'.

Here's my ol' baby: http://www.blinkynet.net/stuff/c3.jpg

sigh yearn

I always wanted an RB67, of course.

I've considered a roll-film-sized 'field' camera with movements as a
reasonable tool, possibly with a range-finder and view-finder attachment
for hand-held use. Linhoff or Plaubel perhaps. But a 'Woodsman' or

When I mentioned brands from 40 years ago, when I first got interested in
photography, I almost mentined Linhof because it popped into my mind, but
then I thought it might be a foreign word in a p'n's group.

similar kit for a 5x4 'plate' might be cheaper, and quite a lot of fun.
When I'm not broke ...

I keep waiting for that condition. I keep buying stuff anyway.

5x4 reminds me of contact printing onto Kodalith, back in the day.
clickety I guess that's been discontinued.

clickety

The V700 looks like a nice rig. Nice assortment of accessories
apparently in the box, too -- charger, powerpack, mem, etc. Had good
luck with it? VGA videos, too. Mine only goes 320x240. My DSLR will
do VGA, but for the cost it should also get me drinks.

I haven't ventured into movies with it, but I've been pleased with the

They don't interest me. But when I get a new camera that does them, I
shoot a few seconds just because I paid for it.

stills results, printed up to A4 size. Despite it's small size, the
camera handles well - although I still think I'd rather have
completely manual control all the time rather than have to work out
how to make the electronics do what I want.

This automatic stuff can be complicated!

I find it gets in the way horribly. I know that I want (say) f/2 for
this and the depth of field to go fuzzy at around 6' from the camera; so
which 'scene' or 'mode' on this particular camera will give me something
like that? What exactly does 'night mode' /do/? At least I'm not
burning film while I find out!

I'm with you on all that.

Hey, I can see why lenses wouldn't be as fast on these cameras as on more
costly ones -- but why are they so limited at the *small* aperature end of
the spectrum? This one seems to only go to f7-point-something. Come to
think of it, even my DSLR lens (non-interchangeable) only goes to f8. At
least when I was doing film, par for common stopped-down lenses was f16
and I think I have a 24mm with f32.

There ya go. It's not much good if it's at home and you're not.

Quite. I've always tried to have a compact of some sort with me at
all times; for a while I had a Minox 'spy camera' which was
surprisingly useful - and the digital compacts, with their tiny image
sensors, have some of the same qualities as the 'sub-miniature' film
cameras.

Right. You can be executed for using them around the wrong kind of
paperwork!

There is that, of course. Goes for airports or certain buildings too,
in some parts of the world.

In summer of 2002, less than two years after 9/11, my buddy and I were on
a road trip out east. One of our stops, since we were nearby, was the
first US nuclear powerplant, at Shpping Port, Pennsylvania. It's not like
they had tours or anything -- we just wanted to see it. We did, and took
photos from outside the fence. It wasn't until we were driving to our
next point of interest that we realized that it wouldn't have been a
stretch to have to do some explaining to this or that authority about
those photos, and in retrospect I *am* surpised that we weren't met by
Vehicles With Government Agency Names On Them.

I got that C3 specifically to slow myself down and *make* me think more
about what I was doing and what I wanted.

It will certainly do that for you!

Did. The ground glass (and the reversed display) made me more
contemplative.

I do sometimes go out with just a 'toy' such as my Practica SlimPix
just to force myself to let go and allow whatever happens to happen
when I click the button. Occasionally what comes out can be pleasing,
even if it isn't anything like what I expected! (Rather like doing
water-colour in the rain).

Today, I took the subway down to Chinatown, just to get outta the
house on a little local excursion. I packed the new Fuji. Everything
on auto. Crick, crick, crick. It was fun. And they came out well.

Compressed and *way* smallerized from 3295 x 2472, of course:

http://www.blinkynet.net/odds/chinat...own/index.html

Didn't even crop those, except the very last one (to get a close-up of
the rail car coupler from the front). They're just as they came out of
the camera; all I did was have some of my software batch-resize them
while I played a couple games of Free Cell.

Now if I'd only thought to get a shot of all that shrimp...

Did you get any actual shrimp?

From the above: http://tinyurl.com/ywrj4x

Looks like an interesting part of town - and the pictures aren't at all
bad either ) (Folk in my part of the world would get a bit
suspicious about anyone taking snaps of the techy bits of the transport
system).

Sadly, I thought of that myself as I was going that. sigh

But I can't say I blame them, either.

I shot those two coupler images at the Chinatown stop while I was waiting
for my train. The front view is of the train I boarded. After I got on,
some guy in transit authority garb got on, too. I've only ridden the
Metro trains twice, and not seen that, so I wondered if he'd was keeping
me in view and had radioed for backup.

If this is a ploy to get me to put up some of mine ... well I did have

Nah. I discovered in an installed program I'd never used that it had a
gallery feature, and since I wanted to share those photos with my buddy I
gave it a try. Not bad for a little quick-n-dirty show. Since I'd just
created that and uploaded it for him, I thought I'd stick it in here, too.

an account at one of those 'sharing' places but I let it lapse; I really
should start using some of the web space I'm probably 'entitled' to.
Hmmm.

There ya go. One good thing about that is that I've found, being a dialup
user, that with some of them you have to wait for a bunch of unrelated
images (site stuff, teases for other photos and/or galleries, etc.) to
download. So mostly, when I see links to them I just don't bother.

Now that I've sussed how this program makes its galleries, I can make the
url less cumbersome, too, by removing a couple unneeded directories.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net