hasselblad Mon, 14 May 2001 Volume 1 : Number 1226 In this issue: Re: Second Good Idea Hasselblad "F" series lenses with new 20x bodies... Box idea 2X extenders Re: 2X extenders Re: Box idea Re: 2X extenders Re: extension tubes Re: 2X extenders Re: 2X extenders Re: 2X extenders Fuming Re: 2X extenders Re: 2X extenders RE: First Good Idea 2X Converters Re: Use For Old Paper Boxes Re: 2X Converters ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:52:14 +0000 From: b.ferster@att.net To: "Stein" , hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Second Good Idea Message-ID: <20010513105215.WIJO29100.mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> >PPS: For the chap who asked what I do in the darkroom that leaves me woozy. It's the mercury and bromine fumes.< Used in poaching wombats? .............B.F............... > Dear Friends, > > And this one has a definite Hasselblad connection. Square pictures. > > We all make 'em. 12 per roll of 120, 70 per roll of 70mm., etc. > > A lot of us then make 'em rectangular. 8 x 10, 6 x 4, 12 x 16, cabinet, half > plate, promenade, etc. etc. In some cases because the client wants that size, in > some cases because we want that size, and in some cases because the paper comes > in that size. And in some cases because we have a Saunders one-size easel and > that is the only size we can make. ( Not strictly true, folks, some of us put > black card inserts inside the easel and end up with rather elegant bordered > prints. The Saunders also has the advantage that it cannot be broken in fits of > uncontrollable rage....) > > When we want to do the Swedish Square Dance we have to trim off one edge of > the paper, slip it into the adjustable easel, print it up, take it out, readjust > the easel, drop the print on the floor, do it again, stop for coffee, etc. This > explains a lot of the language that comes out of the darkroom. > > Is there any manufacturer who makes a sturdy one-size metal or plastic easel > that produces 8 x 8, 5 x 5, or 10 x 10? Are there any CUSTOM equipment workshops > that could do this - possibly incorporating masks for fixed borders? Also > incorporating tabs that could be gaffer-taped to the baseboard for repeated > print runs? > > Uncle Dick > > PS: Small addendum. I asked for the list's ideas about using 8 x 10 paper boxes > constructively. Howzabout the 4 x 5 film boxes that have 2 inner boxes? > > PPS: For the chap who asked what I do in the darkroom that leaves me woozy. It's > the mercury and bromine fumes. > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 08:40:36 -0400 From: "Austin Franklin" To: Subject: Hasselblad "F" series lenses with new 20x bodies... Message-ID: Here's what I found out for the 205FCC and using the "F" and "CF" (using the focal plane shutter) lenses without having to use the aperture pre-release. The best mode to use appears to be the "Ab" (actually just A, but they share the same switch position) mode. It allows 5 full stops of compensation, which will work for all but the smallest apertures. This will allow me to meter full open, and shutter will be fully automatic. In "Ab" mode, the compensation does not get reset when you press the shutter button...and can be reset when you use the "Lock" button on the side. To meter, I just point the camera where I want to meter, press the shutter button half way, which takes and locks the exposure, then I re-compose the image. "D" mode can't be used at all. Though it has programmable compensation. The issue is you can only take the exposure reading when you press the lock button on the side, and that resets the compensation. Also, the shutter release doesn't lock the exposure, like in the "Ab" mode. I would have to reset the compensation every time...after the meter reading is locked. "Z" mode is OK to use too...it gives you 5 full stops of compensation. The compensation is set by holding down the lock button, and using the arrow keys to move the default starting zone...the starting zone doesn't get reset by just pressing the "lock" button... The only advantage of "Z" mode over "Ab" mode is you get the compensation from the film back figured into the exposure...if you are using compensation. The "L" indicator, that indicates the exposure is "locked", only comes on in "Ab" mode...even though "D" and "Z" mode lock the exposure too... A little inconsistent in the interfaces... All in all, I think they really didn't do a good job at all to allow the use of "F" and "CF" (with the FP shutter) lenses with this camera. It appears to me that the changes to make them work reasonably well could be easily done in firmware, if they only thought it through in the first place. I was told by someone at the Hasselblad factory that the teeth were removed from the shutter speed ring (and I quote): "1. The coupling was very delicate in manufacturing and handling when we introduced an electronical coding of the shutter speed setting. The risk of malfunction was too high so we decided to eliminate this coupling. For FE lenses the coupling is of course not necessary in automatic mode." It doesn't sound right to me...I don't see how an electronic sensor is effected by the inclusion of teeth that couple the aperture and the shutter speed ring, unless they just don't want the shutter speed ring moved much...but all the 2000 have had a sensor (of some kind) on the shutter speed ring...they all have electronic shutters... Also as a note, the CFE lenses do NOT transfer the shutter speed information to the camera body! If they did, you could meter them in manual mode just like an "FE" lense. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:11:07 -0400 From: "Anne B." To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Box idea Message-ID: <3AFE95F5.740C791C@strato.net> > But the paper box always carries the bright colour and advertising logo of the manufacturer Just an idea from the past----when I was teaching school, we used Xerox copy paper boxes for files. To avoid the many logos we used a peel and press shelf paper that came in rolls. All it takes is some measuring and cutting and a little time. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 22:19:23 -0700 From: "bradleya" To: Subject: 2X extenders Message-ID: <001201c0dcfe$9c93a6e0$7301a8c0@hometrain.com.tw> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C0DCC3.EE1411C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have a 180 F4 Sonnar and I'm considering the purchase of an extender. = The Mutar is the obvious first choice, but I would like some personal = experiences with the ones made by companies such as Kenko, Rokunar, = Vivitar, etc. The largest prints I normally make are 16 X 16. I usually use 160 asa = print film and 100 asa slide film. Much of my work is candids done in = the street and I often hand-hold at 1/250. Is the degree of superiority of the Zeiss Mutar so great as to make the = purchase of an off-brand extender a bad choice? Many thanks for your suggestions, Brad Vance ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C0DCC3.EE1411C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have a 180 F4 Sonnar and I'm = considering the=20 purchase of an extender.  The Mutar is the obvious first choice, = but I=20 would like some personal experiences with the ones made by companies = such as=20 Kenko, Rokunar, Vivitar, etc.
 
The largest prints I normally make are = 16 X=20 16.  I usually use 160 asa print film and 100 asa slide film.  = Much of=20 my work is candids done in the street and I often hand-hold at=20 1/250.
 
Is the degree of superiority of the = Zeiss Mutar so=20 great as to make the purchase of an off-brand extender a bad=20 choice?
 
Many thanks for your = suggestions,
 
Brad Vance
------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C0DCC3.EE1411C0-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 13:04:07 -0400 From: Michael Gardner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: 2X extenders Message-ID: <3AFEBE87.1D63D389@earthlink.net> Let me put my answer in perspective by saying I have never used an extender with my Hasselblad lenses. I do plan to purchase one in the near future. My thought is that I have invested considerable money in my Hasselblad gear. I consider the lenses to be some of the finest available in medium format. At this point, I would not compromise the quality of the process by taking a chance on a third party extender. I'll wait to purchase the Mutar even if that means saving up for it a bit longer. Just my hardnosed uncompromising $.02. :-) Mike Gardner > bradleya wrote: > > I have a 180 F4 Sonnar and I'm considering the purchase of an > extender. The Mutar is the obvious first choice, but I would like > some personal experiences with the ones made by companies such as > Kenko, Rokunar, Vivitar, etc. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:18:17 -0700 From: Mark Rabiner Cc: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Box idea Message-ID: <3AFEC1D9.1B377AD2@rabiner.cncoffice.com> One last idea. I've had these boxes of Agfa or Ilford paper piled high all over my studio filled with prints. The more actives ones that I'd show people almost every day I'd break the front side upon on the inside shell of the box. That way I'd be able to grab them out from the front instead of dumping them out. Some of them i taped the edges of my break front so it looked better. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 12:20:04 -0500 From: Gregg Laiben To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: 2X extenders Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010513121029.00af01e0@mail.kc.rmi.net> At 22:19 5/14/01 -0700, you wrote: >I have a 180 F4 Sonnar and I'm considering the purchase of an >extender. The Mutar is the obvious first choice, but I would like some >personal experiences with the ones made by companies such as Kenko, >Rokunar, Vivitar, etc. I have looked at a used Rokunar in the store, but have never used one for taking an image. I could see that it was soft in the viewfinder with reduced contrast, so saw no need to even try (although for portrait work, it might be just the thing ). I eventually purchased a used 2x Mutar and have never regretted it. Typically use it on a tripod with a 250 Sonnar with excellent resolution and sharpness. This thing _is_ a Zeiss lens (at least my older version is - newer ones are labelled Hasselblad and purportedly are NOT manufactured by Zeiss) and is perfectly suited behind their optics. I have never tried to hand hold it. The 2x Mutar will cost you two stops. Given your shooting example, you'll be hand holding at 1/60th with what is essentially a 360mm lens. ....gregg ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 13:34:02 EDT From: DvanAckere@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: extension tubes Message-ID: Just a word of caution with 8 mm extension tubes and a 501cm or 503cw ... the milled edge of the ring scrapes against the collar of the newly designed shutter release. As a result of this new design the older 10 mm tubes won't even mount on the bodies. I've considered filing the offending tube edge, but haven't gotten around to it. Other than an obviously overlooked design flaw, I can't discern a reason for this anomaly. Once I have carefully files the edge, does anyone know how to properly re-blacken it? Thanks in advance for any ideas, suggestions. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:45:30 -0700 From: Jim Stewart To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: 2X extenders Message-ID: <3AFEC83A.EA6D67C9@jkmicro.com> I'd have to agree with Gregg. I bought a 2x Komura on ebay for less than $200. There's a reason it was so cheap. I'll probably end up taking the glass out of it and using it for an extension tube (: Gregg Laiben wrote: > At 22:19 5/14/01 -0700, you wrote: > >I have a 180 F4 Sonnar and I'm considering the purchase of an > >extender. The Mutar is the obvious first choice, but I would like some > >personal experiences with the ones made by companies such as Kenko, > >Rokunar, Vivitar, etc. > > I have looked at a used Rokunar in the store, but have never used one for > taking an image. I could see that it was soft in the viewfinder with > reduced contrast, so saw no need to even try (although for portrait work, > it might be just the thing ). I eventually purchased a used 2x Mutar > and have never regretted it. Typically use it on a tripod with a 250 > Sonnar with excellent resolution and sharpness. This thing _is_ a Zeiss > lens (at least my older version is - newer ones are labelled Hasselblad and > purportedly are NOT manufactured by Zeiss) and is perfectly suited behind > their optics. > > I have never tried to hand hold it. The 2x Mutar will cost you two > stops. Given your shooting example, you'll be hand holding at 1/60th with > what is essentially a 360mm lens. > > ....gregg > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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. > > Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. > > 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: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:59:17 -0700 From: Jim Brick To: hasselblad@kelvin.net, Subject: Re: 2X extenders Message-ID: <200105131803.LAA19175@spoon.alink.net> The older version of the Hasselblad 2x Mutar is Zeiss. The current version= of the Hasselblad 2x Mutar is Japanese. I found and purchased a Zeiss 2x Mutar= on the recommendation of my local Hasselblad dealer and factory rep. I use it routinely with my 180 CFi lens and routinely make 20x24 Cibachrome prints= from the transparencies. It is an awesome performer. You cannot in any way tell that an extender was used. 20x24's are dead sharp. I wouldn't even consider a brand-x or even the current Hasselblad 2x. Find a Zeiss 2x. Jim At 10:19 PM 5/14/01 -0700, bradleya wrote:=20 > > I have a 180 F4 Sonnar and I'm considering the purchase of an extender.=A0= The > Mutar is the obvious first choice, but I would like some personal experiences > with the ones made by companies such as Kenko, Rokunar, Vivitar, etc. > =A0 > The largest prints I normally make are 16 X 16.=A0 I usually use 160 asa= print > film and 100 asa slide film.=A0 Much of my work is candids done in the= street > and I often hand-hold at 1/250. > =A0 > Is the degree of superiority of the Zeiss Mutar so great as to make the > purchase of an off-brand extender a bad choice? > =A0 > Many thanks for your suggestions, > =A0 > Brad Vance ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 14:24:35 -0400 From: Marc James Small To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: 2X extenders Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010513142435.00b03320@pop.infi-net.mindspring.com> At 10:59 AM 5/13/2001 -0700, Jim Brick wrote: >I wouldn't even consider a brand-x or even the current Hasselblad 2x. Find a >Zeiss 2x. Jim You da man! I've borrowed and used both the older and newer tele-extenders and the Zeiss is clearly superior. Shame on Hasselblad for cheapening the breed! Marc msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 07:00:59 +0800 From: "Stein" To: Subject: Fuming Message-ID: <004101c0dc00$c320eec0$98b237cb@oemcomputer> Dear B.F., No, the bromine is used in the sensitizing box and the mercury is used in the vapourizer. Before you can load the roll of silvered copper sheet in the A 12 magazine you have to sensitize it over the iodine and bromine and then when you have taken the pictures you run it over the heated quicksilver to develop the images. This is no mean feat considering the tensile strength of copper. We have never tried poaching wombats though I suppose you could do it. Where would you get a big enough piece of toast to serve the poached wombat on, however - and would it go soggy with all that wet fur? We did try cooking japanese last month. The court case comes up Tuesday. Uncle Dick ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 19:19:37 -0500 From: "s c o tt h i c ks" To: Subject: Re: 2X extenders Message-ID: <00e301c0dc0b$8f9c25a0$e0bdb218@nblvil1.in.home.com> The 2000 Hasselblad product catalog has a ""Converter 2XE" listed on page 23 (note: the word "Mutar" is missing). Is this the same as the "2x Mutar" listed in this thread? Additionally, in the product catalog, I see the word "Mutar" used with the "Zeiss PC-Mutar 1.4X Shift Converter". Could this subtle change in description wording flag the Japanese glass? s c o tt h i c ks Charles Hicks Photography MrCharlesHicks@home.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Brick" To: ; Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 12:59 PM Subject: Re: 2X extenders The older version of the Hasselblad 2x Mutar is Zeiss. The current version of the Hasselblad 2x Mutar is Japanese. I found and purchased a Zeiss 2x Mutar on the recommendation of my local Hasselblad dealer and factory rep. I use it routinely with my 180 CFi lens and routinely make 20x24 Cibachrome prints from the transparencies. It is an awesome performer. You cannot in any way tell that an extender was used. 20x24's are dead sharp. I wouldn't even consider a brand-x or even the current Hasselblad 2x. Find a Zeiss 2x. Jim At 10:19 PM 5/14/01 -0700, bradleya wrote: > > I have a 180 F4 Sonnar and I'm considering the purchase of an extender. The > Mutar is the obvious first choice, but I would like some personal experiences > with the ones made by companies such as Kenko, Rokunar, Vivitar, etc. > > The largest prints I normally make are 16 X 16. I usually use 160 asa print > film and 100 asa slide film. Much of my work is candids done in the street > and I often hand-hold at 1/250. > > Is the degree of superiority of the Zeiss Mutar so great as to make the > purchase of an off-brand extender a bad choice? > > Many thanks for your suggestions, > > Brad Vance ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. 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: Sun, 13 May 2001 17:25:22 -0700 From: Jim Brick To: hasselblad@kelvin.net, Subject: Re: 2X extenders Message-ID: <200105140029.RAA14602@spoon.alink.net> At 07:19 PM 5/13/01 -0500, s c o tt h i c ks wrote: >The 2000 Hasselblad product catalog has a ""Converter 2XE" listed on page 23 >(note: the word "Mutar" is missing). Is this the same as the "2x Mutar" >listed in this thread? Additionally, in the product catalog, I see the word >"Mutar" used with the "Zeiss PC-Mutar 1.4X Shift Converter". Could this >subtle change in description wording flag the Japanese glass? > >s c o tt h i c ks Sorry, I use the word Mutar from habit. We're talking about the ordinary 2x extender, not the shift Mutar. Jim ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 19:30:46 -0700 From: "bradley hanson" To: "Stein" , Subject: RE: First Good Idea Message-ID: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C0DBE3.355CB0A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Great plan, Dick. My full support. Let the letter writing campaign begin... b r a d l e y h a n s o n Seattle, WA http://www.hansonphotography.com -----Original Message----- From: Stein [mailto:stein@bekkers.com.au] Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 6:35 PM To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: First Good Idea What a good idea if the manufacturers - Agdak, Koji, Fufa, Ilness, etc were to package their paper in a PLAIN WHITE BOX - or a plain red, yellow, or green box- and put ALL of the advertising logo on a sticker on the side in the normal manner. And then possibly shrink-wrap the box with a further plastic wrapper carrying as much logo and advertising as they wish. Then we poor grubs who buy it would peel off the stickers and use the boxes much as Mark has suggested. We might even be pursuaded to pay just a little extra for the new packaging - considering we are buying a useful container rather than more trash for the compactor. ARE YOU LISTENING IN LEVERKUSEN AND ROCHESTER? Uncle Dick ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C0DBE3.355CB0A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Great=20 plan, Dick. My full support. Let the letter writing campaign=20 begin...
 
b r a d l e y  h a n = s o=20 n
Seattle, WA
http://www.hansonphotography.com=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Stein=20 [mailto:stein@bekkers.com.au]
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 = 6:35=20 PM
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: First Good=20 Idea

    What a good idea = if the=20 manufacturers - Agdak, Koji, Fufa, Ilness, etc were to package their = paper in=20 a PLAIN WHITE BOX - or a plain red, yellow, or green box- and put ALL = of the=20 advertising logo on a sticker on the side=20 in the normal manner. And then possibly shrink-wrap the box with a = further=20 plastic wrapper carrying as much logo and advertising as they=20 wish. Then we poor grubs who buy it = would peel=20 off the stickers and use the boxes much as Mark has = suggested.
 
    We might even be = pursuaded to=20 pay just a little extra for the new packaging  - considering we = are=20 buying a useful container rather than more trash for the=20 compactor.
 
    ARE YOU LISTENING = IN=20 LEVERKUSEN AND ROCHESTER?
 
    Uncle=20 Dick
------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C0DBE3.355CB0A0-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 22:17:39 -0500 From: "s c o tt h i c ks" To: Subject: 2X Converters Message-ID: <012401c0dc24$6ea033a0$e0bdb218@nblvil1.in.home.com> Well now you guys got me wondering ... I found this on photo.net: "My understanding is the Zeiss Mutar was optimized for the Zeiss CF 350 Sonnar (although it could give good results with shorter lenses), while the Hasselblad 2XE is optimized for the shorter telephotos, and is particularly good with the 180 CFi " Is this really how these converters are optimized? Best Regards, s c o tt h i c ks Charles Hicks Photography MrCharlesHicks@home.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 00:21:52 -0400 From: "LEO WOLK" To: Subject: Re: Use For Old Paper Boxes Message-ID: <01c0dc2d$67208f40$7265570c@fofyplfq> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C0DC0B.E00EEF40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable How about covering the boxes with that fake stick-on=20 wood, and giving them away as Christmas gifts? Not only=20 do you get rid of the surplus boxes, you can use the=20 money you'd normally "waste" on "real" gifts to buy more=20 paper and chemicals! If you start now, you should just about have them all=20 ready by December! Good Luck, Leo. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C0DC0B.E00EEF40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 
How about covering the boxes with that fake stick-on=20
wood, and giving them away as Christmas gifts?  Not only=20
do you get rid of the surplus boxes, you can use the=20
money you'd normally "waste" on "real" gifts to buy =
more=20
paper and chemicals!

If you start now, you should just about have them all=20
ready by December!

Good Luck,   Leo.
------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C0DC0B.E00EEF40-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 22:10:33 -0700 From: Jim Brick To: hasselblad@kelvin.net, Subject: Re: 2X Converters Message-ID: <200105140514.WAA26752@spoon.alink.net> At 10:17 PM 5/13/01 -0500, s c o tt h i c ks wrote: >Well now you guys got me wondering ... > >I found this on photo.net: > >"My understanding is the Zeiss Mutar was optimized for the Zeiss CF 350 >Sonnar (although it could give good results with shorter lenses), while the >Hasselblad 2XE is optimized for the shorter telephotos, and is particularly >good with the 180 CFi " > >Is this really how these converters are optimized? > >Best Regards, > >s c o tt h i c ks My knowledge, as gleaned from my Hasselblad rep and local dealer is that the Zeiss 2x extender that was the predecessor to the current 2xE Japanese extender, was a general purpose extender. And it certainly seems that way as it works flawlessly with my 180 CFi lens. Jim ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #1226 ************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. 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