john_lynch5

<p>It's all part of the Point of Sale system which is used for sales and inventory record keeping. Everything you see sold in a retail environment with a few exceptions, will have a UPC Bar Code. You have to buy the UPC from an authorized seller; the code is unique to a given product and become part of a universal data base. You can have the same code for different cards (different photo's) but some retailers may not accept it if they want to keep a record of which card sells the best.</p>

Using manual is how you LEARN photography. You have to be aware of all the variables when using manual. If you learn using manual, you will know why the auto functions work the way they do. You will know when to use auto exposure compensation (you can do "exposure compensation" manually also, by increasing/decreasing the shutter speed or aperture). If you don't learn using manual, you will not know how to use manual when you need to.

<p>I certainly hope Art doesn't come down with the flu on the day he is supposed to be shooting a wedding.</p>

Members of the media are not exempt from privacy laws.

<p>Rod, as a retired CPA my advice to you is to talk to a local CPA. Without knowing about your business in detail, no one on this or any other forum can give you accurate advice. There is a ton of misinformation on the web about taxes and taxation.</p>

O.K., thanks Ulf.

I understand the use of the search engines to locate the photo. My real question is why did you spend the time to search? I don't mean the question to be critical; it's just that I have posted some photo's on another site some time ago and it never has entered my mind to spend several hours searching to find out if one of my photo's had been used by someone else.

Somewhat off topic but I am really curious. How does one discover that one's photograph is being used on the Web by someone else, especilly in case like this where I see no relationship between the OP and where the photo is being used. In other words, with the millions of photographs that are posted on the web, how would you discover, not one but two, totally unrelated postings of a single photograph?

<p>I just looked through the viewfinder on one of my EM's and the bottom edge looks straight to me.</p>

I believe that the shutter speed is fixed at 1/125 but the aperture is variable (auto).

I'm making a couple of assumptions here. This contest is likely to be part of the preliminary's for the national Hooter's swimsuit competition for 2009. If so, you can be sure there are agreements that the girls sign with all sorts of stipulations: model release, use of photographs, etc. The OP was aware of what the friend was using the photographs for. He agreed to do the photo's at no charge. She then used the photo's only for the purpose she said she would use them for. Assuming the above, Hooter's is more than likely off the hook as far as any monetary compensation goes. He probably could get a "cease and desist" order to stop any further sales and to destroy any remaining posters, if he would bring a case against the girl who used the photo's to enter the contest. However, because he knew what she was using the photo's for and there were no written agreement or contract, he in effect gave her implicit permission to use the photo's for the known purpose: to enter the contest. It is therefore unlikely he could prevail in any legal action.

Any bulb with the correct bayonet is the "correct" bulb for your flash. Since the GE 6 worked (btw, I believe the GE 6 is a bulb designed with a long duration to sync with focal plane shutters at higher speeds), Bulbs were selected primarily based upon output and film type. Blue bulbs for daylight color film and clear bulbs for B&W. You could use blue for B&W but they were more expensive. Bulbs were pretty costly in their day, about 10 cents each which would be equivalent to around a dollar each today. Thats for the amatuer bulbs, The more powereful screw base bulbs were even higher.

Watch your local TV weather and the weather person is being televised in front of a green screen; the weather maps and other graphics are superimposed behind him.

 

The software for video is much more expensive than for still photography simply because of the complexity of the shooting environment. In the still world, you remove the color one image at a time and insert the background one image at a time. In television, you need to be able to change the "background" seamlessly during the telecast.

<p>1. Don't sell the M3 (actually 40 years ago.)<br>

2. Don't trade the IIIF.<br>

(both of the above had 50mm Summicrons)<br>

3. Don't sell all the Topcon equipment.</p>

The printer may be free, but the ink ribbons and paper will cost you an arm and a leg. Depending on where you get the supplies, you are looking at between $3 and $5 per print.

<p>La Dolce Vita, the character Paparrazo gave birth to the use of "Paparrazi".</p>

<p>The zoom ratio is exactly the same. 18-200 zoom lens is roughly 11 to 1; 18mm times 11 equals 198mm. The 18-200mm designation is for full frame, i.e. FX. On the DX the 18-200mm becomes a 27-300mm equivalent lens; 27mm times 11 equals 297mm. </p>

<p>"Some AI and third party lenses will work, but won't meter correctly"<br />AI (and third party AI) will all work on the FG. The exposure will be correct because when the shutter is released, the OTF metering will take over. What you don't get with non AIS lenses is the f-stop readout in the viewfinder when in program mode.</p>

<p>I used vinegar for stop bath in B&W processing instead of buying the packaged stuff in my younger days. It works just the same as the packaged chemical which is acetic acid in powder form.</p>

I used a pencil eraser for years to clean the battery contacts in my manual cameras. Then I found a battery contact cleaner at a camera store. It looks like a mechanical pencil and has a stiff brush (probably nylon) that retracts. This worked better than the eraser. However, when I got my Canon EOS, I didn't think that rubbing those contacts on the lens and mount would be a good idea (I guess I was correct from the info above). I went to an electronics store (Fry's) and found "MG Chemicals Super Contact Cleaner". This stuff is great. It looks like a small marker. Just gently apply it to the contacts with just enough rubbing to get on them and the contacts are clean.

<p>This is the compact 1.8 lens that was introduced at the same time as the N2000 body (1985). This lens replaced the AI-S 1.8 that was the same construction as the AI 1.8. This lens is similar in appearance to the "E" series 1.8 and does not have the coupling prong. There are two versions of this lens; the first focuses to 2 ft., the second focuses to 1.5 ft.</p>

Actually, the first paragraph on the inside flap of the dust cover states " "Nikon' is virtually synonymous with the 35mm single-lens reflex camera system. .... Nikon (and Nikkormat) have represented the epitome of SLR perfection for professsional and amateur users alike."

The advantage of the FM over the FM-2 (same with FE/FE-2) is that you can use every Nikon lens ever made with the exception of the "G", "DX" and a couple of old lenses that required mirror lock up. The AI tab on the FM and FE flip out of the way so that the pre AI lenses are useable without conversion (stop down metering, but easy to do with LED's).

I have recently done some research on this very subject myself since I recently purchased my first DSLR after years of using film. From what I learned, I won't be using my 283's or 285's on my new camera. The discharge voltage can be high enough to fry the electronics. Some say you can test the voltage and if it is low enough, you can use the old flash. I have too much invested (not near what that D90 costs) that I don't want to take a chance.

The ATX was a more expensive series than the SL series of Tokina lenses.