I have decided that there is no point in my having my slides mounted.
I shall have them in strips from now on.
I am really glad that I take notes. I was persuaded to tidy my cellar
today, and I found where I had hidden some slide films from 1996 (in a
projector magazine). I had to use my notes to annotate some of the
scans of the films I carried out today – while tidying up the cellar of
course.
Moose, did you find an editor for EXIF Camera Data?
Chris
On 27 Aug 2004, at 14:34, Walt Wayman wrote:
> As promised, today's answer to what wasn't really even yesterday's
> question:
>
> Smokey bokey # 1 = 90/2 Zuiko macro
> Smokey bokey # 2 = 90/2.8 Tamron 1:1 macro
>
> These slides came back from processing in unnumbered plastic mounts.
> I hate plastic mounts because they are slick and slippery and harder
> to handle than cardboard mounts, which is precisely why I almost
> immediately dropped half the bunch and got them all shuffled up.
> Since they weren't numbered, I had to remove the film from the mounts
> in an attempt to tell which shot was which. Because of my shoddy
> note-taking when shooting, this wasn't nearly as easy or precise as it
> might sound.
>
> Anyway, to make a long story short, there is some likelihood that the
> Tamron shot, which does appear to have just a teeny bit more depth of
> focus now that I look more closely at it, may -- just may -- have been
> taken at f/9.5 instead of f/8. Since the Tamron lens has half-stop
> detents, I took a couple of shots at the intermediate settings, and I
> think this may, just may, be the f/8-11 one.
>
> Anyway, to use the single word my wife says she's having engraved on
> my tombstone: Whatever!
>
> Walt
>
> --
> "Anything more than 500 yards from
> the car just isn't photogenic." --
> Edward Weston
>
>
> -------------- Original message from hiwayman@xxxxxxx (Walt Wayman):
> --------------
>
>> Last summer I did a short series (about half a roll of Provia 100F)
>> of test
>> shots to compare the 90/2 Zuiko and the 90/2.8 Tamron macros. I
>> couldn't tell
>> any real difference. Now, since the bokeh subject has reared its
>> fuzzy head
>> again, and because the 90/2 Zuiko is said by many to have the most
>> wonderful
>> bokeh, I'm putting up a couple of shots, one taken with each lens.
>> About the
>> only thing these lenses have in common is that they both have
>> nine-blade
>> diaphragms.
>>
> Bla, bla, bla...snip
>
>>
>> http://home.att.net/~hiwayman/wsb/html/view.cgi-photo.html--SiteID
>> -724214.html
>> http://home.att.net/~hiwayman/wsb/html/view.cgi-photo.html--SiteID
>> -724215.html
>>
>> Walt, the bokeh clod
>>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
+44 (0)7092 251126
ftog at threeshoes.co.uk
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko
... a nascent photo library.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|