Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #75764 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-10-07 16:07 +0300 |
| Last post | 2025-10-12 12:10 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 351 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2025-10-07 16:07 +0300
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-07 14:39 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-07 22:52 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-08 01:35 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-08 10:53 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-08 21:06 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-09 21:25 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-09 21:45 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-09 21:41 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-10 09:21 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-10 13:21 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-10 21:15 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-10 21:53 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 02:46 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 02:38 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-09 02:09 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-10-09 18:52 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-09 21:33 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-11 15:10 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-11 17:48 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-11 19:01 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-11 19:08 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-11 19:32 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 22:29 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-12 11:07 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-13 09:06 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-10-18 16:24 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-18 21:02 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-19 01:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-19 13:39 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-20 02:10 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-20 05:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-20 02:33 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-20 02:31 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-20 19:21 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-19 12:17 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-19 02:22 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-19 04:28 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-19 11:19 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 09:20 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-25 12:49 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-25 16:45 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-25 22:16 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 01:51 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-26 04:40 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 08:42 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 09:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 10:06 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 19:25 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-26 19:48 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 21:29 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-27 00:44 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-26 00:57 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 07:14 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 11:05 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 02:00 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 11:02 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-25 22:03 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-25 21:19 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 01:50 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-26 04:40 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-26 14:52 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 19:06 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-26 20:29 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 21:22 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-26 22:17 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-27 10:09 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-27 21:23 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-28 00:47 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-28 00:27 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-28 07:45 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-28 23:05 +0000
Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-28 13:46 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-28 18:47 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-28 20:21 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-28 23:46 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-29 01:41 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-29 11:07 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-29 18:47 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-29 22:15 +0000
Re: Accents. Allodoxaphobia <trepidation@example.net> - 2025-10-30 17:29 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-30 17:31 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-30 19:31 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-30 20:14 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-30 20:11 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-30 20:10 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-30 21:35 +0100
Re: Accents. candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-10-30 21:40 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-30 15:18 -0700
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:17 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-30 21:46 -0700
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:25 +0000
LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:38 +0100
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-01 20:50 -0400
Re: LED lights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 11:14 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 15:41 +0100
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:57 +0000
Re: LED lights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-03 00:12 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 02:38 +0100
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 00:19 -0500
Re: LED lights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-03 07:03 +0000
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 14:20 -0500
Re: LED lights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 20:02 +0000
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-04 04:42 +0000
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 02:31 -0500
Re: LED lights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 10:16 +0000
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 01:51 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 15:48 +0100
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:42 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 21:33 +0100
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-30 22:21 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 04:59 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-31 14:41 +0100
Re: Accents. John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 08:56 -0700
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:53 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-31 19:02 -0700
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 02:52 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-01 05:32 +0000
Re: Accents. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-19 19:19 +0000
TV tropes (was: Re: Accents.) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-20 11:01 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-20 13:10 +0100
Re: TV tropes Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-20 17:57 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-20 21:28 +0100
Re: TV tropes Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 02:10 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 13:14 +0100
Re: TV tropes Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 02:09 +0000
Re: TV tropes rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-21 07:41 +0000
Re: TV tropes Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-11-21 09:00 +0000
Re: TV tropes The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 09:13 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 13:17 +0100
Re: TV tropes rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-21 19:28 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 20:43 +0100
Re: TV tropes The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 23:00 +0000
Re: TV tropes rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-22 04:06 +0000
Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:24 +0100
Re: Not Blade Runner Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 19:57 +0000
Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:22 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 01:22 +0000
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 15:50 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:20 +0000
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 21:34 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 02:47 +0000
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 13:05 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 20:04 +0000
Re: Blade runner c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 15:40 -0500
Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 22:30 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 17:48 -0500
Re: Flashlights Ian <gay@sfuu.ca> - 2025-11-03 20:26 -0800
Re: Flashlights Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-11-04 04:55 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 02:35 -0500
Re: Flashlights Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-11-05 03:44 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 01:05 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-05 13:20 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:08 -0500
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-05 16:33 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-05 20:37 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:26 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-06 11:56 +0100
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-06 18:42 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 17:30 -0500
Re: Flashlights candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-11-07 16:20 +0000
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-07 18:11 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-07 18:50 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-07 22:42 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-07 21:08 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-08 13:31 +0100
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-08 16:05 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-08 20:06 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-09 00:04 -0500
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-09 20:08 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-10 00:41 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-10 12:07 +0000
Re: Flashlights John-Paul Stewart <jpstewart@personalprojects.net> - 2025-11-09 19:05 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-10 00:58 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:12 -0500
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-06 05:09 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 01:31 -0500
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-06 18:39 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-04 07:51 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 02:19 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-04 09:55 +0000
Re: Flashlights Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 18:16 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 20:39 +0100
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 22:54 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-21 23:52 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-21 23:32 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-22 06:49 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-22 03:14 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-22 11:32 +0000
Re: Flashlights Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-22 22:00 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 02:35 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-23 09:40 +0000
Re: Flashlights Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-23 20:15 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 22:10 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 01:42 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-23 22:09 +0100
Re: Flashlights Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-24 02:17 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 22:19 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 21:58 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-24 20:28 +0100
Re: Flashlights Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-24 15:04 -0800
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-04 11:28 +0100
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-04 11:15 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 13:27 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-04 19:37 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 21:12 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 13:22 -0500
Re: Flashlights Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-04 20:52 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 21:23 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-05 13:23 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:10 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-06 12:05 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 17:21 -0500
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-05 07:21 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 03:54 -0500
Re: Flashlights Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 18:20 +0000
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-04 09:52 +0000
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-05 07:21 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 03:17 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-05 11:54 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-05 16:41 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:16 -0500
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-05 22:22 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:41 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-06 12:10 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 17:24 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-07 02:44 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 21:53 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-04 11:12 +0100
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 23:14 +0100
Re: Accents. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-19 19:01 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:19 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-01 05:33 +0000
Blade runner. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:29 +0100
Re: Blade runner. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 19:56 +0000
Re: Blade runner. c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-01 21:38 -0400
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:31 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:48 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-31 22:45 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:22 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-30 21:33 +0100
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-30 22:20 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-30 23:36 +0100
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 04:51 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-31 14:48 +0100
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 15:03 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 20:15 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-01 11:15 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:39 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:26 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:44 +0100
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:05 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:54 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 11:15 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:02 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:10 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:49 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 11:13 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 18:48 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 10:12 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-03 20:04 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-04 04:28 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 13:11 +0100
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 12:26 +0000
Re: Accents. John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 09:17 -0800
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:42 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 20:01 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-01 11:15 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:33 +0000
Re: Accents. Don_from_AZ <djatechNOSPAM@comcast.net.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:43 -0700
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-02 19:30 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 02:21 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:47 +0000
Re: Accents. Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-10-30 22:48 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:58 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 08:25 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:09 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:29 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-30 21:50 -0700
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 08:28 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:29 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 08:27 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:41 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-31 22:45 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-01 05:36 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:11 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:59 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-28 18:54 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-28 09:34 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-26 13:53 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-10-26 15:40 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 19:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-11-02 14:03 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-26 22:20 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-27 08:29 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-11-02 14:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 14:15 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 02:37 +0100
OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-02 18:49 -0800
Re: OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 06:54 +0000
Re: OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-03 08:19 -0800
Re: OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 10:18 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-27 09:34 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-27 21:26 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-19 03:36 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-11 19:31 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-12 01:33 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-11 22:52 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-11 22:48 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-12 02:43 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-12 12:12 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 22:02 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-12 06:39 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-12 02:59 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-12 19:20 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-10-13 16:50 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-13 18:38 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 01:38 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 01:45 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-12 12:17 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-13 03:28 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-13 03:41 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-13 10:20 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-13 11:55 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-13 21:56 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-14 00:35 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 01:21 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-14 06:56 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-14 17:20 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 20:01 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-15 05:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-15 03:33 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-15 21:18 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-16 02:24 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-15 06:31 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-15 09:00 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-15 21:24 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-15 15:11 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-16 02:27 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-16 07:22 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-17 22:24 -0400
Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-18 20:08 +0200
Re: Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-19 04:15 -0400
Re: Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-19 13:46 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-16 04:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-16 10:29 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-16 01:49 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-16 15:43 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-10-14 21:30 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-14 22:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-12 12:10 +0100
Page 10 of 18 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 18 Next page →
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-04 09:55 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <10ecii3$3i0a8$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77016 |
On 04/11/2025 07:19, c186282 wrote: > Electronic flashes may also not be good for cameras > with focal-plane shutters since the flash often does > not last long enough for the shutter to traverse > across the entire negative. That's why you use long exposures to record a scene with flash. The shutter is no longer involved -- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 18:16 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <10fqaah$3spoa$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77021 |
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 04/11/2025 07:19, c186282 wrote: >> Electronic flashes may also not be good for cameras >> with focal-plane shutters since the flash often does >> not last long enough for the shutter to traverse >> across the entire negative. > > That's why you use long exposures to record a scene with flash. > > The shutter is no longer involved Indeed, you simply need the shutter fully open when the flash impulse occurs. The flash impulse is fast enough to stop motion all by itself.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 20:39 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <0pr6vlxn46.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77780 |
On 2025-11-21 19:16, Rich wrote: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> On 04/11/2025 07:19, c186282 wrote: >>> Electronic flashes may also not be good for cameras >>> with focal-plane shutters since the flash often does >>> not last long enough for the shutter to traverse >>> across the entire negative. >> >> That's why you use long exposures to record a scene with flash. >> >> The shutter is no longer involved > > Indeed, you simply need the shutter fully open when the flash impulse > occurs. The flash impulse is fast enough to stop motion all by itself. There is a mode in which it matters. You regulate things so that ambient light and flash are roughly similar. For example, a portrait with crepuscular light in the back, you use the flash to illuminate the faces which would be dark otherwise. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 22:54 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <10fqqjg$21du$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77783 |
On 21/11/2025 19:39, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-11-21 19:16, Rich wrote: >> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> On 04/11/2025 07:19, c186282 wrote: >>>> Electronic flashes may also not be good for cameras >>>> with focal-plane shutters since the flash often does >>>> not last long enough for the shutter to traverse >>>> across the entire negative. >>> >>> That's why you use long exposures to record a scene with flash. >>> >>> The shutter is no longer involved >> >> Indeed, you simply need the shutter fully open when the flash impulse >> occurs. The flash impulse is fast enough to stop motion all by itself. > > There is a mode in which it matters. You regulate things so that ambient > light and flash are roughly similar. > Indeed. > For example, a portrait with crepuscular light in the back, you use the > flash to illuminate the faces which would be dark otherwise. > I took a wonderful picture in a beach bar in Marbella - a tripod time exposure of the moon and a flash to illuminate the people in the bar. -- "Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) " Alan Sokal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 23:52 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <sp-cnS2Kp5Uw3Lz0nZ2dnZfqnPUAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #77783 |
On 11/21/25 14:39, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-11-21 19:16, Rich wrote: >> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> On 04/11/2025 07:19, c186282 wrote: >>>> Electronic flashes may also not be good for cameras >>>> with focal-plane shutters since the flash often does >>>> not last long enough for the shutter to traverse >>>> across the entire negative. >>> >>> That's why you use long exposures to record a scene with flash. >>> >>> The shutter is no longer involved >> >> Indeed, you simply need the shutter fully open when the flash impulse >> occurs. The flash impulse is fast enough to stop motion all by itself. > > There is a mode in which it matters. You regulate things so that ambient > light and flash are roughly similar. > > For example, a portrait with crepuscular light in the back, you use the > flash to illuminate the faces which would be dark otherwise. But, if the ambient light is a noteworthy percentage then you CAN'T leave a shutter, esp FPS, fully open or you'll get ghosting. There's no catch-all solution for every camera and situation alas. FPS were very popular but iris shutters were perhaps more flexible for dealing with flash situations. And price a medium/large format image array ... mostly they won't even DARE mention price, it's always (Contact Us). Yet, can't diss the extra pixels - depth and tone increase considerably.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 23:32 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <sp-cnTKKp5V2obz0nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #77780 |
On 11/21/25 13:16, Rich wrote: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> On 04/11/2025 07:19, c186282 wrote: >>> Electronic flashes may also not be good for cameras >>> with focal-plane shutters since the flash often does >>> not last long enough for the shutter to traverse >>> across the entire negative. >> >> That's why you use long exposures to record a scene with flash. >> >> The shutter is no longer involved > > Indeed, you simply need the shutter fully open when the flash impulse > occurs. The flash impulse is fast enough to stop motion all by itself. ELECTRONIC flash will usually stop motion. Olde-tyme flash not so much. And there are still ALL those (oft expensive) focal-plane shutter cameras out there ... e-flash IS a problem there unless it's ALL the light, not just 'fill'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-22 06:49 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <10frmd7$8gqr$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77799 |
On 22/11/2025 04:32, c186282 wrote: > On 11/21/25 13:16, Rich wrote: >> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> On 04/11/2025 07:19, c186282 wrote: >>>> Electronic flashes may also not be good for cameras >>>> with focal-plane shutters since the flash often does >>>> not last long enough for the shutter to traverse >>>> across the entire negative. >>> >>> That's why you use long exposures to record a scene with flash. >>> >>> The shutter is no longer involved >> >> Indeed, you simply need the shutter fully open when the flash impulse >> occurs. The flash impulse is fast enough to stop motion all by itself. > > ELECTRONIC flash will usually stop motion. Olde-tyme flash > not so much. > > And there are still ALL those (oft expensive) focal-plane > shutter cameras out there ... e-flash IS a problem there > unless it's ALL the light, not just 'fill'. > Its no problem as long as the flash happens when the shutter is fully open. > -- Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas? Josef Stalin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-22 03:14 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <QPicneoEvZJi7bz0nZ2dnZfqn_oAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #77802 |
On 11/22/25 01:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 22/11/2025 04:32, c186282 wrote: >> On 11/21/25 13:16, Rich wrote: >>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>> On 04/11/2025 07:19, c186282 wrote: >>>>> Electronic flashes may also not be good for cameras >>>>> with focal-plane shutters since the flash often does >>>>> not last long enough for the shutter to traverse >>>>> across the entire negative. >>>> >>>> That's why you use long exposures to record a scene with flash. >>>> >>>> The shutter is no longer involved >>> >>> Indeed, you simply need the shutter fully open when the flash impulse >>> occurs. The flash impulse is fast enough to stop motion all by itself. >> >> ELECTRONIC flash will usually stop motion. Olde-tyme flash >> not so much. >> >> And there are still ALL those (oft expensive) focal-plane >> shutter cameras out there ... e-flash IS a problem there >> unless it's ALL the light, not just 'fill'. >> > Its no problem as long as the flash happens when the shutter is fully open. Hmmm ... daylight, bright background, need some fill for the foreground. "Fully open" means a VERY slow effective shutter speed. Sorry, won't work. Blank white, or zone-9 fuzzy, background or black foreground. In some respects modern electronic cameras can resolve most such weird issues - but even 25mpix doesn't compete with old medium/large format for overall image quality. In short you can't always get there from here.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-22 11:32 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <10fs6vm$cn1j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77803 |
On 22/11/2025 08:14, c186282 wrote: > Hmmm ... daylight, bright background, need some > fill for the foreground. "Fully open" means a VERY > slow effective shutter speed. Sorry, won't work. My cameras shutters would be fully open at 1/125, In full daylight with sane ISO that was about f 16.. -- Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people. But Marxism is the crack cocaine.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-22 22:00 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <10ftbpt$rk22$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77805 |
On Sat, 22 Nov 2025 11:32:06 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > In full daylight with sane ISO that was about f 16.. f/16, perhaps?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-23 02:35 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <J-ydnfVXDYCnJL_0nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #77828 |
On 11/22/25 17:00, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Sat, 22 Nov 2025 11:32:06 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> In full daylight with sane ISO that was about f 16.. > > f/16, perhaps? In THEORY, 1/16th of the lens inherent (full open) aperture. Problem is that it is not a measure of the light getting to the film. f/16 with a long lens delivers less light than f/16 with a short lens. Always thought there should be an "illumination index" so you could switch from long to short and, at the same shutter speed, get the same exposure.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-23 09:40 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <10fukr4$19e0t$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77842 |
On 23/11/2025 07:35, c186282 wrote: > On 11/22/25 17:00, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> On Sat, 22 Nov 2025 11:32:06 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> In full daylight with sane ISO that was about f 16.. >> >> f/16, perhaps? > > In THEORY, 1/16th of the lens inherent (full open) > aperture. > No. > Problem is that it is not a measure of the light > getting to the film. f/16 with a long lens delivers > less light than f/16 with a short lens. > No. > Always thought there should be an "illumination > index" so you could switch from long to short > and, at the same shutter speed, get the same > exposure. > I think a basic book on cameras might be more useful to you. -- WOKE is an acronym... Without Originality, Knowledge or Education.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-23 20:15 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <10fvq1n$1ok2v$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77843 |
On Sun, 23 Nov 2025 09:40:52 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > I think a basic book on cameras might be more useful to you. Such a book would tell you why it’s “f/16”, not “f 16”: it’s a ratio.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-23 22:10 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <Er6cnYb3pa8jUb70nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #77851 |
On 11/23/25 15:15, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 23 Nov 2025 09:40:52 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> I think a basic book on cameras might be more useful to you. > > Such a book would tell you why it’s “f/16”, not “f 16”: it’s a ratio. Look it up on WikiPedia or something. The 'f' number of a lens is the ratio of its diameter to its focal length. 'f/16' means blocking enough so the lens SEEMS like an f/16 primary. Shop for a 120mm f/16 telescope lens and the lens will be 120mm wide and the focal length will be 1920mm. Great for looking at the moon or Jupiter/Saturn. YOU get to deal with the 2-meter tube.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-23 01:42 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <FCmdnVXqmoMkMb_0nZ2dnZfqn_QAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #77805 |
On 11/22/25 06:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 22/11/2025 08:14, c186282 wrote: >> Hmmm ... daylight, bright background, need some >> fill for the foreground. "Fully open" means a VERY >> slow effective shutter speed. Sorry, won't work. > > My cameras shutters would be fully open at 1/125, > > In full daylight with sane ISO that was about f 16.. Then you're in pretty good shape. I have a number of cameras and not all would be so generous. For flash you ARE better off with leaf shutters because they're small and quicker. Hmm ... have a couple of unused PI3s ... maybe I should make one into a shutter profiler by adding an A/D board. It could make nice graphs afterwards. I figure three or four photodiodes across the frame area. As said somewhere, modern image chips/software CAN make a lot of 'impossible' shots possible. However at some level they're "fake" ... two or three+ images scaled processed and spliced on top of each other. Look nice, but NOT sure I'd immediately accept a modern iPhone photo as evidence in a court case. Find "Photo Fakery"- (Brugioni 1999) ... and he just covers the more obvious Cold War instances. Film still has its place, but not EVERY place. Medium/large format has an image quality/tone I've yet to see with electronic systems. In a sense it's the NON-linear quirks which contribute to that as much as the higher 'pixel' count. DO still miss Verichrome Pan wide-latitude film. You could get a good shot of Granny sitting on a bench in the shade and ALSO get good detail in the bright-lit background.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-23 22:09 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <no9cvlxj8v.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77841 |
On 2025-11-23 07:42, c186282 wrote: > Film still has its place, but not EVERY place. > Medium/large format has an image quality/tone > I've yet to see with electronic systems. In a > sense it's the NON-linear quirks which contribute > to that as much as the higher 'pixel' count. > > DO still miss Verichrome Pan wide-latitude film. > You could get a good shot of Granny sitting on > a bench in the shade and ALSO get good detail > in the bright-lit background. Film photography had problems with dust, that I do not see with digital. The paper copies would have several white dots. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-24 02:17 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <10g0f85$20k3o$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77854 |
On Sun, 23 Nov 2025 22:09:11 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > Film photography had problems with dust, that I do not see with digital. I remember a report that one of the last “Star Wars” movies that George Lucas worked on (the prequel series?) was the first movie ever done completely digitally, from camera capture (plus CG, of course) through compositing and editing to final print. Not all the cinemas could afford digital projectors to show the movie as it was intended, so some had to make do with a film transfer. Apparently the quality of that was pretty bad.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-23 22:19 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <zU2dnSd9lrVAU770nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #77864 |
On 11/23/25 21:17, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 23 Nov 2025 22:09:11 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >> Film photography had problems with dust, that I do not see with digital. > > I remember a report that one of the last “Star Wars” movies that George > Lucas worked on (the prequel series?) was the first movie ever done > completely digitally, from camera capture (plus CG, of course) through > compositing and editing to final print. > > Not all the cinemas could afford digital projectors to show the movie as > it was intended, so some had to make do with a film transfer. > > Apparently the quality of that was pretty bad. Probably not 'dust' however ... piss-poor hardware setup instead. Likely projected it on a physical screen whilst pointing a 35mm film camera at it :-) Oh well, so long as the rubes still fork over the ticket money ........ Oh, ever LOOKED at movie film up close ? It's very grainy, horrible image quality. The 'quality' is a perceptual illusion, the brain combining all those crappy images, averaging things out. Yet another case of where 'reality' and 'perception' are NOT the same thing :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-23 21:58 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <zU2dnSR9lrVyVL70nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #77854 |
On 11/23/25 16:09, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-11-23 07:42, c186282 wrote: >> Film still has its place, but not EVERY place. >> Medium/large format has an image quality/tone >> I've yet to see with electronic systems. In a >> sense it's the NON-linear quirks which contribute >> to that as much as the higher 'pixel' count. >> >> DO still miss Verichrome Pan wide-latitude film. >> You could get a good shot of Granny sitting on >> a bench in the shade and ALSO get good detail >> in the bright-lit background. > > Film photography had problems with dust, that I do not see with digital. > The paper copies would have several white dots. But the dust is part of the CHARM ! Adds 'reality', that "human hands involved" aspect :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-24 20:28 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Flashlights |
| Message-ID | <d7oevlxkv5.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77867 |
On 2025-11-24 03:58, c186282 wrote: > On 11/23/25 16:09, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2025-11-23 07:42, c186282 wrote: >>> Film still has its place, but not EVERY place. >>> Medium/large format has an image quality/tone >>> I've yet to see with electronic systems. In a >>> sense it's the NON-linear quirks which contribute >>> to that as much as the higher 'pixel' count. >>> >>> DO still miss Verichrome Pan wide-latitude film. >>> You could get a good shot of Granny sitting on >>> a bench in the shade and ALSO get good detail >>> in the bright-lit background. >> >> Film photography had problems with dust, that I do not see with >> digital. The paper copies would have several white dots. > > > But the dust is part of the CHARM ! Adds 'reality', > that "human hands involved" aspect :-) > heh, heh :-) -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 18 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 18 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web