nigel d

Your tripod head is also known as a Bogen 3275 geared head. If you want to adapt it to take Arca Swiss quick release, see here:

 

http://www.kirkphoto.com/platformsc.html

 

You need the SQRC3271.

 

The 410 geared head does already have a quick release system. You can get replacements/extras for it, for instance here:

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5564-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_3271_3271_RC4_Quick_Release.html

I twould be worth your time taking a quick look at the manual. On page 57 is some information about TTL flash on the P67II. See:

 

http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/manual/67II.pdf

 

In short, you can use Pentax dedicated flases that have the 5P connection. You have, no doubt, noticed that there is no hot shoe on the camera, so to use a dedicated flash (or any flash) on camera, you must have the hot shoe grip. The P67II grip has a hotshoe that connects to the camera through the 5P connector on the body.

 

I don't know that you can use a Canon or Nikon flash as a dedicated flash. However, there are third party flashes that have the Pentax 5P connection.

 

I have no idea how you might set up dual flashes using TTL. I would be tempted to say that if you are doing something that sophisitcated, you should be comfortable useing a flash meter.

If your insurance uses replacement value, it is probable that they will ask you to purchase a replacement and send in the bill for re-imbursement.

Putting some math around it, at $10 per roll and 5 rolls per week, you are looking at $50 weekly.

 

B&H says that a Nikon CS 5 or 5000 would be $550 or $1000 See:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/shop/1151/Film_Scanners_Accessories_Film_Scanners.html

 

Then in 11 weeks, it would become cost effective to purchase a film scanner.

If it is not your photo, it is not yours to redistribute.

Why did you bill the newspaper? It was the band that broke the terms of your agreement. The newspaper owes you nothing; if you are going to bill anyone, bill the band. But why not just settle for correction?

I will go a completely different route. Given your relative novelty to photography, your money might best be spent on photography classes right now.

1. Do you have a phone number, address, and/or email? Shouldn't these be on a business card?

 

2. Unusual fonts and pictures can cause problems for the many people that scan business cards. Information can become corrupt or missing.

I would suspect a USB problem. The Nikon scanners appear to like to have a USB port to themselves. Do not connect it through a hub.

John,

 

WOW!

 

It would have read better if you had written this on a faster computer with a smaller monitor placed a few feet to the right. Also, you should photoshop in serifs on your fonts.

Look at previous threads on silver retention.

If we assume that the methods used to gather the list of names is accurate, we still run into a statistical problem. You have eliminated the possibility that each 3/3 could be generated by one person; that is, there is no stalker looking to give you 3/3s. This makes your seemingly high probability suspect. What do the stats say if you run them on the whole list?

What do you suppose is better for Nikon; giving up on scanners before everyone who wants one has one, or ending production before the market is saturated? Before you answer, think about the margin that Nikon makes on them (it is probably a higher margin than a DSLR).

 

Also, think about the manufacturing methods. Just like cameras, these probably aren't falling off an assembly line at a rate of one per minute. They are probably produced in batches of a few thousand at time.

 

Then think about shipping time. They need a container full of goods, need to schedule a ship get customes completed etc.

 

From the time that the Nikon warehouse is empty to the time it gets refilled could be a couple of months or more.

 

Then think about the people that are panicing that scanners are no longer available and will buy any that are available...

Vuescan is a good option. Nikon Scan will also run under XP.

My quick and dirty math indicates that the scans were done at 900-1000 dpi. Certainly not a high resolution scan. Using a Nikon CS 9000 you would be able to scan at 4000dpi. If it were me, I would be having a very angry conversation at this point.

1. Vuescan will not preview an entire strip of film. It does one frame at a time.

 

2. You can not use all three applications at the same time. Each one will require exclusive use of the scanner. To use a particular scanning application, you must close the other scanning applications before you start it.

I travel frequently within North America and have never been denied a hand inspection, although sometimes when security is not busy I will need to argue the point with them. To date, I have found that busy security will not argue; they will just do the hand inspection.

 

I always carry some 3200 speed film that won't be put through, and as they must do a hand inspection anyway, they simply hand check all the film.

Google is your friend:

 

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=copyright+derivative&meta=

 

will lead you to:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work

 

And if you read that you will learn that unless you hold the copyright to or a license to the original copyrighted work, you could be sued for copyright infringement.

I made my first foray into medium format with a "used" P67II just under a year ago. I say used, as it was in all the original packaging and included a blank warranty card. I have the 105mm and 75mm lenses, and would like to add something longer; perhaps the 200mm and a 1.4x converter.

 

From the start I have been simply amazed at the huge transparencies I am getting from the camera. However, I have yet to make any really big prints, so I still have not used all that extra resolution.

 

I use the camera about equally on a tripod and hand held. I do not see the problems some claim about the camera being too heavy/cumbersome or having too much vibration to shoot hand held. But then, I am by no means small.

 

My only complaints are that I worry that I may not be able to buy another one if/when I want it and that when I scan the transparancies at 4000dpi on my Nikon CS9000, the files are huge - I can only get 8 on a DVD.

Both bleach and fix run to completion. You can't over bleach, nor can you over fix. Of course, it probably isn't a good idea to leave your film sitting in bleach for hours.

Google is your friend. Try the US Bureau of Larbor Statistics. Photographers is here:

 

http://www.bls.gov/oes/2004/may/oes274021.htm

Philip,

 

I believe you are putting the cart before the horse here. You are suggesting a change to the rating system to fix it, based on the assessment that since there are complaints, it must be broken.

 

But are you sure that the system is broken? What is the purpose of the ratings? Does the site need them at all? Perhaps these are the questions you should be asking first. It is difficult to determine that the system is broken if you are unsure of what the purpose is in the first place.

I think P67 is sufficiently different from other medium format systems that it deserves its own unique forum. However, it appears that you are quite intent on merging. If merging is the only option, then medium format makes more sense, as P67 users have more in common with other medium format film users than with the Pentax digital folks that inhabit the Pentax forum. So the order of preference then is 1, 2, and last 3.

for short periods, the relationship is linear, but at times approaching one second, you may need corrections. See:

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~kitathome/LunarLight/moonlight_gallery/technique/reciprocity.htm

The vast majority of ideas about rating system and the top rated photos are little more than thinly disguised rants about bruised egos. But this idea, I think has real merit.

 

My personal method for looking through TRP is to hit the back button as soon as the page loads. This takes me to the lowest rated. Now, there is often a number of obviously poor photos, but it is also where I have found some of the most interesting photos. The top rated, I find are rather homogenous for the most part; over-saturated, over-photoshopped, snap shots.

 

I like the idea of getting to see the photos that were in some way challenging; garnering either a broad range of scores across raters or garnering very different ratings for A and O. It could be quite interesting to see very mundane scenes done very well (i.e. O-3, A-7) and even poor shots of interesting subjects (i.e. O-7, A-3).

 

My only negative comments on the idea is that I think controversy index is a poor choice of terminology. Challenge index might be a better name. The other problem will be people complaining that their edgey photography is being ignored because too many people are not educated enough to mis-understand it resulting in only 5/5 rates.