hasselblad Fri, 20 Oct 2000 Volume 1 : Number 1023 In this issue: Searchable Hasselblad Archives Re: Digital quality Re: Searchable Hasselblad Archives Re: Digital quality Re: Digital quality Re: Searchable Hasselblad Archives Re: Digital quality Re: Digital quality Re: Digital quality Re: Digital quality Re: Digital quality Re: Digital quality ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:10:36 EDT From: PeteScherm@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Searchable Hasselblad Archives Message-ID: <3a.bd86a1e.27204ccc@aol.com> For the first time in many months, I decided to use the Searchable Hasselblad Archives and attempt to amass whatever I could find on the use of the Kiev/Arsat 30mm fisheye lens, with Hasselblad equipment. I used the URL as given in the mailing list. Then I tried an >> fisheye OR fish-eye << Boolean search. The computer went to a blank page and showed nothing. It didn't freeze, there was just nothing there. So I went back and tried >> Kiev <<. That one gave me one of those "this page cannot be displayed". I've tried this at various times, over the last two days, from different computers.......................and always get the same replies. I'm quite sure I've used these archives many, many months ago; and don't recall having any trouble. Any ideas? Pete Schermerhorn, in the glorious Berkshire hills of western Massachusetts ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:12:30 EDT From: Stymulus@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Digital quality Message-ID: <36.cd65115.27204d3e@aol.com> Dear Sirs- am I going to have to sell my truck and my first born to cover the cost of these new chips and backs? IF you know. Brian In a message dated 10/17/00 8:35:53 AM, leicaman@email.msn.com writes: << Digital quality is about to take a quantum leap. Kodak & Foraeon have just announced perfection of a 16.8 Megapixel chip. Current top of the line cameras have about 3-4 megapixels. That will give a little digital point&shoot about twice the resolution of current 35MM film technology. In a medium format configuration the implications are awesome. The future is HERE and NOW. Rich >> ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 06:25:18 -0700 From: "Peter Klosky" To: , Subject: Re: Searchable Hasselblad Archives Message-ID: Pete, I verified that there is trouble with the search engine, and sent a note = to support@listquest.com about the trouble. Peter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:47:34 EDT From: Cmrausr@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Digital quality Message-ID: << am I going to have to sell my truck and my first born to cover the cost of these new chips and backs? >> I believe I saw a price of around $20,000 for the Kodak back alone. You'll also need top of the line computer to process the files on. Scott Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:34:31 EDT From: BobR38@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Digital quality Message-ID: In a message dated 10/19/00 9:48:49 AM Central Daylight Time, Cmrausr@aol.com writes: << I believe I saw a price of around $20,000 for the Kodak back alone. You'll also need top of the line computer to process the files on. >> I think film and chemical processing will be around a long, long time to come with digital costs that high! Bob R. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:05:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Roger To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Searchable Hasselblad Archives Message-ID: <20001019200526.16490.qmail@web3101.mail.yahoo.com> Well Peter, you are not alone. I tried about 8 different key word searches and each time got zero results. I don't think it is functional. --- PeteScherm@aol.com wrote: > For the first time in many months, I decided to use > the Searchable Hasselblad > Archives and attempt to amass whatever I could find > on the use of the > Kiev/Arsat 30mm fisheye lens, with Hasselblad > equipment. I used the URL as > given in the mailing list. Then I tried an >> > fisheye OR fish-eye << > Boolean search. The computer went to a blank page > and showed nothing. It > didn't freeze, there was just nothing there. So I > went back and tried >> > Kiev <<. That one gave me one of those "this page > cannot be displayed". > I've tried this at various times, over the last two > days, from different > computers.......................and always get the > same replies. I'm quite > sure I've used these archives many, many months ago; > and don't recall having > any trouble. Any ideas? > > Pete Schermerhorn, in the glorious Berkshire hills > of western Massachusetts > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public > service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not > responsible for its content. This mailing list is > in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's > subsidiaries, or affiliates. > > To change your subscription status, go to: > http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > Digest archives are stored at > http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm > Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:44:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Roger To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Digital quality Message-ID: <20001020004407.4430.qmail@web3105.mail.yahoo.com> I'm all for the cheap route: Use film in a camera. Get prints scanned in, etc. $20,000 for a back is totally ridiculous. With the obsolescence in the computer industry happening at such a fast pace, money invested in a back like that is going to have a lot longer time period before a return on investment turns positive. On the other hand, the exhorbitant pricing means that digital isn't going to knock film out of the running for quite some time and probably never since film will always carry much more derivable information unless some engineer somewhere finds a way to violate the fundamental laws of the physical universe with the present materials used. Or, develop some new and as yet unknown technology. --- Cmrausr@aol.com wrote: > << am I going to have to sell my truck and my first > born to cover > the cost of these new chips and backs? >> > > I believe I saw a price of around $20,000 for the > Kodak back alone. You'll > also need top of the line computer to process the > files on. > > Scott Stewart > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public > service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not > responsible for its content. This mailing list is > in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's > subsidiaries, or affiliates. > > To change your subscription status, go to: > http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > Digest archives are stored at > http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm > Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:17:51 EDT From: BobR38@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Digital quality Message-ID: In a message dated 10/19/00 7:44:44 PM Central Daylight Time, contaxaholic@yahoo.com writes: << $20,000 for a back is totally ridiculous. >> No kidding....as I stated before, let's get real here! Stick to film, it's what we love and want around. Digital is a fancy toy for us just to marvel at and send on-line images across wires. Film is the artistic, ever-enduring medium. That's the Past, Present, and Future. Bob R. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:34:03 EDT From: Cmrausr@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Digital quality Message-ID: <43.b9cbfd7.2721091b@aol.com> In a message dated 10/19/00 8:44:44 PM, contaxaholic@yahoo.com writes: << money invested in a back like that is going to have a lot longer time period before a return on investment turns positive. >> I'm not going to get into a long argument about it, but I've saved $12,000.00 in processing costs in the 8 months I've used a Phase One Lightphase back for fashion and product work, not to mention saving the client 48 hours turnaround for proofs and scans. The payback is very short for some types of professional work, and the quality is indistinguishable in print from film. It's pure fantasy to talk about film still outperforming digital for certain applications. Film will survive, but it won't be because it is "better" than digital, it will survive because the characteristics for making prints will remain different from digital. The difference in quality when used on the printed page is already negligible. Scott Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:05:43 -0700 (PDT) From: "Chris J. DiBona" To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Digital quality Message-ID: yep, and you'll be glad for it. We will however let to take a few pictures of them before we take them in exchange for your new dcs-pro digital back. chris -- > Dear Sirs- am I going to have to sell my truck and my first born to cover > the cost of these new chips and backs? IF you know. > > Brian ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:46:01 -0400 From: "LEO WOLK" To: Subject: Re: Digital quality Message-ID: <01c03a48$43cf76a0$f445570c@fofyplfq> Ridiculous for you both, perhaps. Leaf (sp?) backs cost considerably more, and are a "must have" for all high end professional studios. Obsolence be damned, if the customer wants huge digital files, that's what you give 'em. By the time you guys wait for digital to be "affordable" the ship will have sailed. These are high-end professional tools, for high-end professional photographers, with high-end professional budgets! Just my $.02, Leo. -----Original Message----- From: BobR38@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Date: Thursday, October 19, 2000 9:18 PM Subject: Re: Digital quality >In a message dated 10/19/00 7:44:44 PM Central Daylight Time, >contaxaholic@yahoo.com writes: > ><< $20,000 for a back is totally ridiculous. >> > >No kidding....as I stated before, let's get real here! Stick to film, it's >what we love and want around. Digital is a fancy toy for us just to marvel at >and send on-line images across wires. Film is the artistic, ever-enduring >medium. That's the Past, Present, and Future. >Bob R. >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. > >To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad >Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm >Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:05:39 EDT From: BobR38@aol.com To: bigleo@worldnet.att.net, hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Digital quality Message-ID: In a message dated 10/19/00 10:35:03 PM Central Daylight Time, bigleo@worldnet.att.net writes: << Obsolence be damned, if the customer wants huge digital files, that's what you give 'em. >> Leo, You made a good point. If the requirements of customer are huge digital files, that's what they must have. Roger and I were viewing this from the perspective of the lower-end user. I can see how a large studio would be able to and has no choice but to have the high-end digital capability in order to accomodate the demanding clientele. Bob R. ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #1023 ************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html