Std & Fine

What happened to the Newsgroup rec.photo.digital? That's where I should
post this but my computer doesn't show any posts that group for a few days
now.

I have a Sony DSC-F828 that will take and store photos in several different
types of files (raw, tiff, jpg) but it also in automatic mode stores it as
"fine" instead of "standard". Would someone please enlighten me as to the
difference? I know that "fine" requires more storage space.

"Ed Mullikin" wrote in message
news
What happened to the Newsgroup rec.photo.digital? That's where I should
post this but my computer doesn't show any posts that group for a few days
now.

I have a Sony DSC-F828 that will take and store photos in several
different types of files (raw, tiff, jpg) but it also in automatic mode
stores it as "fine" instead of "standard". Would someone please enlighten
me as to the difference? I know that "fine" requires more storage space.


Less compression. As a general rule, you should always avoid
higher-compression settings, as they may degrade the image somewhat.

"Ed Mullikin" wrote in message
news
What happened to the Newsgroup rec.photo.digital? That's where I should
post this but my computer doesn't show any posts that group for a few days
now.

No problem
It is now and always has been an active group.
It must be a problem w your news reader or ISP

Fred

"jeremy" wrote in message
news:KeS0h.1987$ee4.64@trndny06...

"Ed Mullikin" wrote in message
news
What happened to the Newsgroup rec.photo.digital? That's where I should
post this but my computer doesn't show any posts that group for a few
days now.

I have a Sony DSC-F828 that will take and store photos in several
different types of files (raw, tiff, jpg) but it also in automatic mode
stores it as "fine" instead of "standard". Would someone please
enlighten me as to the difference? I know that "fine" requires more
storage space.


Less compression. As a general rule, you should always avoid
higher-compression settings, as they may degrade the image somewhat.

And rec.photo.digital appears to be it always was. Perhaps you need to reset
your list!

rec.photo.digital: I unsubscribed and then resubscribed but the last
post in that newsgroup given by my setup is 10/23. I dunno what's wrong.
"Fred Lebow" wrote in message
...
"Ed Mullikin" wrote in message
news
What happened to the Newsgroup rec.photo.digital? That's where I should
post this but my computer doesn't show any posts that group for a few
days now.

No problem
It is now and always has been an active group.
It must be a problem w your news reader or ISP

Fred

Ed Mullikin wrote:
rec.photo.digital: I unsubscribed and then resubscribed but the last
post in that newsgroup given by my setup is 10/23. I dunno what's wrong.

Ed-

Why not try a News Client, such as Thunderbird, that's free and has some
features that OE doesn't. http://www.mozilla.org/

It allows one to easily quote and set the cursor at the end of the
quoted material.

--
JOhn McWilliams

Coach: "Are you just ignorant, or merely apathetic?"
Player: "Coach, I don't know, and I don't care."

"John McWilliams" wrote in message
. ..

Why not try a News Client, such as Thunderbird, that's free and has
some features that OE doesn't. http://www.mozilla.org/

It allows one to easily quote and set the cursor at the end of the
quoted material.

The new version of OE (now called Windows Mail) included with Windows
Vista adds that option. I think it should have been there all along,
and by default. It's a convenience feature though, since hitting the
down arrow does the same thing, but even in Vista, the default is to
leave the cursor at the top (Microsoft programmers can be SO stupid).
I don't know if Office 2007 fixes that setting or not, but in 2003
Outlook still top posts.

I switched from using Forte Agent to OE because it's much better at
organizing threads and it actually gives me more control over messages
but less customization of the interface. And since reading posts is
what it's all about, I had to go where the software worked. I didn't
really realize what I was missing until Vista came along and I played
with it for a few weeks. I now use Windows Mail or Outlook Express
almost exclusively for reading text groups.

When I tried out Ubuntu, Kubuntu, and openSUSE at the same time as
testing Vista, I had the chance to use Thunderbird. But like most
Linux programs, it's just way too far behind the basic competition to
be practical. There was nothing about Thunderbird, beyond the freeware
aspect, that attracted me. It was more like an old outdated version of
Agent with a klutzy interface than anything else.

Don't get me wrong, I'd really like to see Linux software catch up and
be competitive. But as it stands right now, Linux just doesn't have
what it takes to draw away Windows users at all. I'm hoping that will
change in the next couple of years, but if they don't get their
collective s#it together, Linux will never get any serious support or
contention in the mainstream desktop market. Which is sad, because I
like the idea of an open source operating system for everyone.

Bill wrote:

When I tried out Ubuntu, Kubuntu, and openSUSE at the same time as
testing Vista, I had the chance to use Thunderbird. But like most
Linux programs,

Thunderbird isn't a "Linux program". It's a Windows, Mac, and Unix
program. (I don't much care for it, either.)

Don't get me wrong, I'd really like to see Linux software catch up and
be competitive.

That's funny, because I've never seen even a single Windows, or Mac GUI
newsreader that is even usable compared to Unix newsreaders. I really
want there to be a good GUI newsreader, but I have yet to see even one
that measures up or that I would care to use. Thunderbird, of course,
isn't it. Luckily, Unix software runs on the Mac, so all is not lost
for folks who want a decent desktop system.

--
Jeremy |

In article ,
Jeremy Nixon wrote:

That's funny, because I've never seen even a single Windows, or Mac GUI
newsreader that is even usable compared to Unix newsreaders.

I like this one as well as I like Gnus, but I also have slrn with vim
for some insane groups that I shouldn't visit.

"Bill" wrote:
When I tried out Ubuntu, Kubuntu, and openSUSE at the same time
as testing Vista, I had the chance to use Thunderbird. But like
most Linux programs, it's just way too far behind the basic
competition to be practical. There was nothing about
Thunderbird, beyond the freeware aspect, that attracted me. It
was more like an old outdated version of Agent with a klutzy
interface than anything else.

Don't get me wrong, I'd really like to see Linux software catch
up and be competitive. But as it stands right now, Linux just
doesn't have what it takes to draw away Windows users at
all.

You admit to using perhaps the *worst* example of an
email/usenet reader, and say that Linux is non competitive!
What a hoot.

Try running (X)Emacs and using gnus for mail and Usenet. Once
you actually get over the culture shock, and learn how to make
use of the facilities, the idea going back to Windows style
programs will make you laugh (or shudder).

I'm hoping that will change in the next couple of years,
but if they don't get their collective s#it together, Linux will
never get any serious support or contention in the mainstream
desktop market. Which is sad, because I like the idea of an open
source operating system for everyone.

It depends on what you want. If what someone else decides is
the way it should work is acceptable to you, then Windows is at
least useful (though an Apple Mac is better). If you want a
fully functional OS that does it the way *you* decide works
best... try a BSD or Linux distribution.

Note that Windows is the last choice in that list.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)