Trying to improve 35mm slide scans w/1200 dpi scanner

"Mike Kohary" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 00:40:44 GMT, "Peter D" [email protected] wrote:

Dunno what the beef is between you and "me". Don't care.

If your space/life would be better/warmer/happier without any reminder of
his existence, don't killfile only his messages. Also killfile any
messages
that contain references to him.

Don't you think I thought of that? Alas, it's going to be pretty
difficult to effectively killfile messages that contain references to
"me" in the body, don't you think? If you have a brilliant idea of
how to do it, I'd love to hear it.

Sure. you could start by extending your current filter into the body text of
any message. that would catch all/most of the messages that are replies to
him. " "me" wrote in message", etc.

"Peter D" [email protected] wrote in message
news:loMNd.313249$6l.170703@pd7tw2no...
"Mike Kohary" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 00:40:44 GMT, "Peter D" [email protected] wrote:

Dunno what the beef is between you and "me". Don't care.

If your space/life would be better/warmer/happier without any reminder
of
his existence, don't killfile only his messages. Also killfile any
messages
that contain references to him.

Don't you think I thought of that? Alas, it's going to be pretty
difficult to effectively killfile messages that contain references to
"me" in the body, don't you think? If you have a brilliant idea of
how to do it, I'd love to hear it.

Sure. you could start by extending your current filter into the body text
of
any message. that would catch all/most of the messages that are replies to
him. " "me" wrote in message", etc.

Peter, you misunderstand, this has been explained to Mike and the other
alt.photography NG gang members long ago. They *want* to see my posts so
they can claim justification for applying their vacuous label to me.
Film best.
me

"Owamanga" wrote in message
...
On 6 Feb 2005 15:28:41 -0800, wrote:

His photography related posts are usually wrong and shouldn't stand
unchallenged.

muhahahaha!!! Sorry couldn't resist. :-)

"grol" wrote in message
...
"Owamanga" wrote in message
...
On 6 Feb 2005 15:28:41 -0800, wrote:

His photography related posts are usually wrong and shouldn't stand
unchallenged.

muhahahaha!!! Sorry couldn't resist. :-)

Before you became obsessed with me didn't you use to take photos?
Sign,
me

If the input of a recent lurker is worth anything, keep responding to the
motivation to assist others. I appreciate it.

"Mike Kohary" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Obssessed? Yes, but with the truth about photography, and helping
beginners.

I understand what you're saying. I guess it's a damned if you do, damned
if
you don't kind of thing. If you stop responding, maybe he goes away after
a
while, but in the meantime he misleads newcomers and perhaps other people
respond to him, nullifying your own effort. But if you keep responding,
he's guaranteed to keep coming back (and of course, you'll never win the
"arguments").

Over to `me` now - have the last word by all means. Note the folowing
post as a good example (Mike, fyi - you were called a `F#CKING
HYPOCRITE` by `me`, along with further accusations of the gang
mentality, naturally)

I don't care. He's full of nonsense, which concerns me not at all.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Kohary mike at kohary dot com http://www.kohary.com

Karma Photography: http://www.karmaphotography.com
Seahawks Historical Database: http://www.kohary.com/seahawks
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Peter D" [email protected] wrote in message
news:%42Od.326024$6l.78632@pd7tw2no...
"Mike Kohary" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Obssessed? Yes, but with the truth about photography, and helping
beginners.

I understand what you're saying. I guess it's a damned if you do,
damned
if
you don't kind of thing. If you stop responding, maybe he goes away
after
a
while, but in the meantime he misleads newcomers and perhaps other
people
respond to him, nullifying your own effort. But if you keep responding,
he's guaranteed to keep coming back (and of course, you'll never win the
"arguments").

Over to `me` now - have the last word by all means. Note the folowing
post as a good example (Mike, fyi - you were called a `F#CKING
HYPOCRITE` by `me`, along with further accusations of the gang
mentality, naturally)

I don't care. He's full of nonsense, which concerns me not at all.

If the input of a recent lurker is worth anything, keep responding to the
motivation to assist others. I appreciate it.

I intended no conflict with you Peter but you are incorrect about his
motivations which in reality are mutual masturbation and familial ego
stroking.
Film best,
me

PS: The alt.photography gang hate it when I say film best. They first
attacked me on 10/29/04 in "Camera for my Wife": http://tinyurl.com/5brkq

"Mike Kohary" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Obssessed? Yes, but with the truth about photography, and helping
beginners.

I understand what you're saying. I guess it's a damned if you do, damned
if
you don't kind of thing. If you stop responding, maybe he goes away after
a
while, but in the meantime he misleads newcomers and perhaps other people
respond to him, nullifying your own effort. But if you keep responding,
he's guaranteed to keep coming back (and of course, you'll never win the
"arguments").

Over to `me` now - have the last word by all means. Note the folowing
post as a good example (Mike, fyi - you were called a `F#CKING
HYPOCRITE` by `me`, along with further accusations of the gang
mentality, naturally)

I don't care. He's full of nonsense, which concerns me not at all.

Prevaricator, your post invalidates everything you say.
Film best,
me

PS: The alt.photography gang hate it when I say film best. They first
attacked me on 10/29/04 in "Camera for my Wife": http://tinyurl.com/5brkq

Chrlz!

To the best of my knowlege the best scans are produced by very expensive
drum scanners. If your shots are valuable you might look into an
outside service. Another problem is that every technician that operates
the scanning equipment may not be the best. Trial and error should
satisfy you (i hope)

john

wrote:

The problem with that approach is that newcomers to the group do not
know his `problem`, they see his posts, and may end up with a
photography knowledge like his - ie, completely flawed and limited to
his tiny experience. I think it IS worthwhile to point out his errors,
in detail. Maybe I go overboard sometimes, but I find it hard to
understand how someone can just blandly post an error (eg errors like
- `not all film scanners scan negatives`
- `moving a camera lens away from the body of a camera isn't like an
extension tube`
- `all lenses have independently moving front elements`
- `Agfa Ultra 100 is a great all-purpose film`
..(I could go on and on)

..and then, instead of simply admitting error or listening to
alternative advice or saying `Sorry, I may have misled you`, he turns
it into a torrent of abuse, and tries to twist out of the errors and
misinformation in a manner somewhat like Houdini, but nowhere near as
entertaining.

Obssessed? Yes, but with the truth about photography, and helping
beginners.


Over to `me` now - have the last word by all means. Note the folowing
post as a good example (Mike, fyi - you were called a `F#CKING
HYPOCRITE` by `me`, along with further accusations of the gang
mentality, naturally)