Reading mode: Light Dark

Disappointing results with Digi-Slave on 880

Go to last post
Bob,

Thanks for responding. I had noticed last night that this thread was HOT. Of course that has nothing to do with the fact that half or more of the postings on it were made by me. ;-)

Take care,

Robert
Bob Morrison said:
Bob Morrison said:
How bad is the noise using an ISO of 200?
Click to expand...
Not bad--I don't have to turn down my hearing aids. Seriously, not
at all noticeable to me in 5 x 7 prints. Short exposure time of the
flash helps, I think.
P.S. your thread is now HOT; congrats.
Click to expand...
 
I hope you have found the solution to the disappointing results you are getting. My situation is somewhat different, I used the Nikon SB 24 flash instead of the internal flash for my Coolpix 995. Turns out okay indoors. I even tried umbrella bounce and was pleased with the results. But in daylight, every picture was unexposed. I thought the camera matrix metering would automatically compensate for the fill-in light but it did not. Guess I'll stick to reflectors in future.
 
james said:
I hope you have found the solution to the disappointing results you
are getting. My situation is somewhat different, I used the Nikon
SB 24 flash instead of the internal flash for my Coolpix 995. Turns
out okay indoors. I even tried umbrella bounce and was pleased with
the results. But in daylight, every picture was unexposed. I
thought the camera matrix metering would automatically compensate
for the fill-in light but it did not. Guess I'll stick to
reflectors in future.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but I don't know what you mean by "unexposed." Can you post one of the pictures? Was it too light or too dark?
 
I've been following this thread.. I have the 990 and the digislave 2000. I have been having trouble as well.. Tonight.. with fresh batteries on my son's birthday, I tried taking pictures. The flash was going off, but the pics were dark.. very very dark. I believe I had the settings all correct and have no idea what the problem may be. How disappointing that I missed his birthday shots.. :(

Just wondering if anyone has any other information about this. I don't know where to go from here..

Jody
 
Jody said:
I've been following this thread.. I have the 990 and the digislave
2000. I have been having trouble as well.. Tonight.. with fresh
batteries on my son's birthday, I tried taking pictures. The flash
was going off, but the pics were dark.. very very dark. I believe
I had the settings all correct and have no idea what the problem
may be. How disappointing that I missed his birthday shots.. :(
Just wondering if anyone has any other information about this. I
don't know where to go from here..

Jody
Click to expand...
Hello,

I have not read the entire thread but I believe I get the gist of it. I had been using a Kodak DC290 with multiple external flashes and had been getting excellent results. When the DC290 died this last weekend I decided to give the CP880 a shot (really needed the 990's pc out but not enough $$!). I came home and hooked up my external flashes but they made no difference to the exposure; they were firing but at the wrong time!!! I was left with the cp880s very mediocre flash (low output and HORRIBLE color cast!! the flash is not color corrected; note that the lens is clear and not slightly yellow). I decided to experiment a bit with the slave flash sensors and none of them worked right with my old non Nikon flashes; the 880's preflash was fooling them but then I tried a Nikon SB-26 and wow did it work wonderfully!!! I am in awe of the beauty and accuracy of the exposures (beautiful color cast and complete room coverage). Now my CP880 is semi permanently mounted to my flash bracket and SB-26!!

Hope this helps,
Orly

PS Note I am shooting with a 1.3+ exposure compensation

PPS Lastly I superglued a small yellow filter in front of the cp880's built in flash; it now gives correct color cast.
 
Robert,

Not sure if this applys, but I have a 950 and the Digislave3000. I got great results shooting in slave mode at private parties ( where I was the only one taking pictures). Bbut my first outing at a public function was a total waste. At my sister-in-law's graduation from Nursing School I would get the shot lined up and snap away. But other photographers were beating me to the shot almost every time and they were triggering my flash (I wonder if their shots were overlit, or had a nice studio-like dual light source look????). I tried hardwiring the unit with the Nikon hotshoe and cable and still got nothing good. (Turns out the cable was defective). I have replaced the cable and all is well. I use NiMH batteries and get good results.

Good luck......... john
 
Hi John,

Thanks for your response. I had thought of that also, but I don't really recall there being anyone snapping photos at the same time. Who knows? I did have the same thing happen a couple of times at home though later that evening just playing around with this some, so that makes me think that wasn't the problem.

Not sure if you read some of my later postings, but I think the culprit may have been weak batteries in the flash. I put in a fresh set at home and took a bunch of shots over and over and it flashed every time. I've not had any indoor events lately, so I haven't really given it a good test again. A guy at SR Inc. (manufacturers of the Digi-Slave flash) also suggested that the fact that I was using Manual mode on the flash may have contributed because it takes longer to refresh than the other settings, particularly if the batteries are weak.

Anyhow, I'm hoping I won't have a repeat of the results I had that night.

Take care,

Robert
john_v_phipps said:
Robert,

Not sure if this applys, but I have a 950 and the Digislave3000. I
got great results shooting in slave mode at private parties ( where
I was the only one taking pictures). Bbut my first outing at a
public function was a total waste. At my sister-in-law's
graduation from Nursing School I would get the shot lined up and
snap away. But other photographers were beating me to the shot
almost every time and they were triggering my flash (I wonder if
their shots were overlit, or had a nice studio-like dual light
source look????). I tried hardwiring the unit with the Nikon
hotshoe and cable and still got nothing good. (Turns out the cable
was defective). I have replaced the cable and all is well. I use
NiMH batteries and get good results.

Good luck......... john
Click to expand...
 
orly said:
Hello,

I have not read the entire thread but I believe I get the gist of
it. I had been using a Kodak DC290 with multiple external flashes
and had been getting excellent results. When the DC290 died this
last weekend I decided to give the CP880 a shot (really needed the
990's pc out but not enough $$!). I came home and hooked up my
external flashes but they made no difference to the exposure; they
were firing but at the wrong time!!! I was left with the cp880s
very mediocre flash (low output and HORRIBLE color cast!! the
flash is not color corrected; note that the lens is clear and not
slightly yellow). I decided to experiment a bit with the slave
flash sensors and none of them worked right with my old non Nikon
flashes; the 880's preflash was fooling them but then I tried a
Nikon SB-26 and wow did it work wonderfully!!! I am in awe of
the beauty and accuracy of the exposures (beautiful color cast and
complete room coverage). Now my CP880 is semi permanently mounted
to my flash bracket and SB-26!!

PS Note I am shooting with a 1.3+ exposure compensation
Click to expand...
h e said:
PPS Lastly I superglued a small yellow filter in front of the
cp880's built in flash; it now gives correct color cast.
Click to expand...
Hi Orly

What is the color value of the yellow filter you use in front of the flash ?
 
Robert Niesen said:
I purchased the Digi-Slave Deluxe 2000 a few weeks ago for using
with my Nikon CoolPix 880. I've finally had an opportunity to play
with it the last few days, particularly last night at my son's Cub
Scout pack meeting, and I've had very mixed results. In fact, most
of my pictures last night were incredibly disappointing. Most came
out very dark as if the flash wasn't even firing and I was in a
pitch black room. There was a fair amount of available light in
the large room we were in, and as far as I could tell the
Digi-Slave was firing, but it just didn't seem to be putting out
much flash intensity.
Click to expand...
Hi Robert. I use the 990, but I have had the same problems
with some shots working and some not, using 2 Quantaray MS-1
slave units. My recollection is that the slaves fired in each case,
but then I asked someone to come in and watch while I shot
and indeed the slaves were NOT firing as I thought each time.
The big issue for me is placement. If the slave units are too far
to the right or the left and BACK, they will not pick up enough
light from the main flash (with the exposed e6 slide covering it)
to fire. By moving the slaves a few inches forward, I solved the
problem completely and now I just shoot a couple of test shots
before I place the slaves in their positions. If I move the camera
though, I have to re-test. It becomes a pain, but WOW the
shots look so much better. I've run into the same problem with
using concealed backlight slave flashes against dark backgrounds.
The dome that triggers the slave has to see enough light to
be triggered. Again, you just have to adjust. In one case I simply
taped a piece of white paper around the back of the slave so that
the dome would pick up light from the white paper instead of the
very dark background. In "the field" I usually have a couple of people
hold the slaves or place them on mini-pods (using a clamp mini-pod I
got at the camera store at the mall... starts with "R"??) to clamp
them basically to anything. But in an auditorium with slightly low
light, I NEEDED 2 slaves. 1 would not have done the job.

.. or maybe a stronger, more expensive slave? The Quantarays
are about 20 bucks each... quite a deal. Anyway, good luck. Feel
free to e-mail me if you wanna exchange info.

ilk..
 
I used my Dad's Nikon 880 with my Digislave flash at a wedding once. I did not cover the flash of the 880 put the Digislave on a grip. The reason I didn't cover the flash of the 880 is I was afraid the weakened flash may not be enough to trigger the slave when the subject was too far away (past 20 feet).

I did encounter two problems:

1) As mentioned by someone else, there were other digital cameras in the crowd that would trigger the digislave. Thus the flash would sometimes not work when I took a picture.

2) The digislave has a switch at the back to choose between triggering after 1 or 2 flashes. Digital cameras, including the 880, use a pre-flash so I must set the trigger for two. The trigger switch is too easily changed and I accidentally switched it to 1 many times. I later learned to constantly check that the trigger switch was set right.

Regards,
Bong
 
Robert,

One of the best things about a slave flash is that it doesn't have to be anywhere near the camera. I made a small stand for mine (it doubles as a bracket) so I can put it closer to the subject. You of course want the flash to be just out of the picture. It does, however, take some skill to avoid odd shadows. I bought an Omnibounce (20 dollars) that helps diffuse the light and cut down on the shadows..

Just thought I would throw that in seeing that this thread was still going....
FShoe
Robert Niesen said:
I purchased the Digi-Slave Deluxe 2000 a few weeks ago for using
with my Nikon CoolPix 880. I've finally had an opportunity to play
with it the last few days, particularly last night at my son's Cub
Scout pack meeting, and I've had very mixed results. In fact, most
of my pictures last night were incredibly disappointing. Most came
out very dark as if the flash wasn't even firing and I was in a
pitch black room. There was a fair amount of available light in
the large room we were in, and as far as I could tell the
Digi-Slave was firing, but it just didn't seem to be putting out
much flash intensity.

I had my 880 in P mode, white balance was set to Speedlight, and
ISO was set to 100. I also had the internal flash set to force
flash. I tried to always make sure that the flash indicator for
the internal flash said it was ready, although I don't think the
shutter would have even fired if it weren't since I had it set for
force flash. I also put a piece of black slide film over the
internal flash as instructed at
http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/flash.html in order to block
most of the its flash while still being able to trigger the slave
flash, and this seems to be working just fine. I mostly alternated
between the Manual setting and the red setting for the flash since
these are supposed to generate the most powerful flash. However,
the intensity of the flash just didn't seem to be there on many of
my shots. Many came out almost pitch black, and others were still
darker than I thought they should have been. I definitely think I
could have achieved better results with just the internal flash,
although I would have had to deal with the redeye issues (the main
reason I bought the Digi-Slave). I also tried both the 'W' setting
and the 'T' setting on the zoom head since I was zooming in on some
of these, but it didn't seem to make much, if any, difference.
Some of the shots that came out somewhat decent actually looked
much better when I viewed them on the LCD than they did when I got
them uploaded to my PC and viewed them there.

I've attached some example shots. All came straight out of the
camera. The first shot below is almost pitch black; however, it
does lighten up some if you run it through auto balance in photo
editing software (I did it using Microsoft Photo Editor).

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1526260&a=12871419&p=48189633&Sequence=0&res=high

The second shot below was taken just after this of the same thing
in Auto mode with the flash turned off using only available light;
and, although blurry, it demonstrates that with the available light
I should not have had a problem with the flash.

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1526260&a=12871419&p=48189632&Sequence=0&res=high

The third shot below is also very dark, but again it does lighten
up some doing an auto balance.

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1526260&a=12871419&p=48189630&Sequence=0&res=high

The fourth shot below was taken just after this, and I could tell
on it that the flash seemed to fire more intensely. It's still not
what I would call great, but definitely better than the one taken
just before it.

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1526260&a=12871419&p=48189629&Sequence=0&res=high

I just don't get what's going on here. Am I doing something wrong,
or is it a problem with the camera or the flash?

Could it be a problem with weak batteries in the flash? I thought
they were properly charged, but perhaps not since I had taken a
fair number of pictures with them a few days before. However, the
indicator on the Digi-Slave indicated it was ready to flash; and I
would think it would fire at the same intensity regardless of the
power in the batteries if it says it's ready. Perhaps that's not a
good assumption. I did take some photos with it later when I got
home, and it seemed to be working OK. I was getting much better
results there than an the scout meeting, but the same thing did
happen a time or two. I would add that the shots I took at home
were at a much closer distance.

I also noticed that the battery in my camera was starting to get
pretty weak, but I wouldn't think that would matter with the
Digi-Slave. I would think that all it needs is enough flash to
trigger it, and it seemed to be doing this.

What is the effective range of this flash on the highest intensity
settings? Maybe I'm just expecting too much out of this, but I
doubt that I was much more than 30-40 feet away on some of my
shots, and many were probably closer to 15-20 feet; and I still got
some very dark shots. Even if the flash wasn't putting out enough
light, I would have thought that the pictures would have still come
out fairly decent just because there was a fair amount of available
light -- I wouldn't have expected them to come out almost pitch
black. I've had much better results using the internal flash in
auto mode, although again redeye was often a real problem.

A few days ago I had also tried using the Digi-Slave with the
camera in Auto mode. The flash seemed to work fairly well
(although I was having a hard time not overexposing some of the
shots), but there was quite a bit of noise in the pictures. I
think this is because Auto mode uses an Auto ISO setting, so I'm
assuming it was using an ISO of 200 or 400. That's why I switched
to using the P mode so that I could set the ISO to 100 to eliminate
noise. Could that be part of the problem?

Anyhow, I'm sorry this had been so long-winded. I know it's going
to take some trial and error to figure out what will give me the
best results, but right now I'm just very disappointed with my
results using this flash and perplexed as to what's going wrong.
I'd appreciate any advice or help anyone could give me.

Thanks,

Robert Niesen

--
Regards,

Robert Niesen
Click to expand...
 
Robert,

I read the review by Steve http://www.steves-digicams.com/dsf-1s.html and he had only compliments for the slave unit. I have considered buying one myself but your post has caused me to pause.

The least you could do is refer to THE GUY at SR Electronis by his actual name as it is obvious he tried to provide you assistance. Also, I ask that you find without delay an opportunity to take some new indoor pictures to either confirm that the problem was do to USER ERROR or continue this thread if your opinion has not been reversed.

SR Electronics is undoubtedly losing sales do to your accusations which may or may not be due to any substantiated.

jim kelly
 
Jim,

If you'd bother to read all the postings on this thread, you'd see that in my posting on 5/10/2001 that I specifically referred to Larry as the guy at SR Inc. that I corresponded with. I even included his response to me in the posting, and I also praised him for his willingness to help and for his timeliness in responding. Nor have I accused them of manufacturing an inferior product. I simply asked for help and readily admitted that I could be doing something wrong. You can also see in my postings that I finally decided that it must be due to weak batteries. A morning or two after I had the problem, I put in some fresh batteries and just kept firing off the same shot over and over about 20 times without the problem reoccurring. The flash fired every time, and the pictures were well lit.

Yes, I do need to play around with this some more to see if the problem reoccurs. But am I under any obligation to do so? I don't think so. There's just not enough hours in the day to do everything, and this is not high on my list of priorities right now. Most of my picture taking of late has been outdoors at my kids baseball games. If you want to haul my kids around to baseball practices and games, etc. for a few days, I'll be glad to experiment with this some more. Maybe you can fill in for me at work also. I really think you're barking up the wrong tree here, and I don't appreciate your tone.

I feel that I've done nothing to disparage SR Inc. and their products, and I've certainly not "accused" them of anything. Like everyone else on this forum, I was simply seeking help. Plenty of other people have testified on this forum as to having great success with the Digi-Slaves, while some have also had some problems (most of which are probably due to user error/lack of knowledge in using the flash). While I had problems this one particular evening with it (and yes, I was very disappointed because I missed a lot of picture opportunities that I won't be able to ever recreate), I've also managed to get some pretty good shots with it. I haven't had it for long, and I'm still learning how to best use it. My original posting was an attempt to learn from others how to best do this.

The main reason I bought this flash is to eliminate redeye, which is a major problem with the internal flash on the 880. I'm happy to say that I don't think I've seen redeye in any of my pictures except one that had it in a dog's eyes. Animals are much more susceptible to this anyhow, so I'm definitely satisfied with the flash in this respect.

If you're interested in purchasing one of their slave flashes, I'd suggest you call SR Inc. I've called them a couple of times, and they were very helpful. You might want to specifically ask them about their return policy. I believe they accept returns up to 30 days after purchase. I don't know the specifics of their return policy, but perhaps you could try it out and still be able to return it if it does not meet your expectations.

Regards,

Robert
jim kelly said:
Robert,

I read the review by Steve http://www.steves-digicams.com/dsf-1s.html and
he had only compliments for the slave unit. I have considered
buying one myself but your post has caused me to pause.

The least you could do is refer to THE GUY at SR Electronis by his
actual name as it is obvious he tried to provide you assistance.
Also, I ask that you find without delay an opportunity to take some
new indoor pictures to either confirm that the problem was do to
USER ERROR or continue this thread if your opinion has not been
reversed.

SR Electronics is undoubtedly losing sales do to your accusations
which may or may not be due to any substantiated.

jim kelly
Click to expand...
 
Robert,

I admit that I am guilty of not reading all the posts but did read several. You are correct is sensing my post had a slight tone. I guess the title of your thread which to me was written not as a request for help but as a statement was the cause and the fact that the post was still going on fo so long withour complete resolution.

Oh yeah, I appreciate the offer to take care of your kids for a day but I have my own (in fact one decided to throw up JELLO during the night and now I can't get back to sleep so I figured I'd hit the forums) and know what you mean about limited time. Let's co-write some legislation that will mandate longer days :)

Also I guess I never expected to see a post concerning the issue you have written about since this flash's only function is to fire on the first or second flash.

The last time I wrote to this forum with a less than a congratulatory message was when a guy (Frances) who regualrly posts many nice pics, posted a spy type pic (he calls them candids) of a heavy woman in a bathing suit at the beach which was done in a quite unflattering way.

I've got an Olympus D340R, my pics are at http://www-jim-kelly.com

How about that Minolta D7, ain't she sweet? We will be seeing many new 5+ MP digicams over the next few months I suppose. I will need one, a new faster computerand a higher resolution printer. I need some legislation that will mandate my employer pay me more so that I can afford these things :)

Check out my latest masterpiece
users.erols.com/jamesgkelly/bubbleboy.jpg

Keep on posting!
Jim
 
Hi, Jim,

I also have an 880, along with a Digi-Slave Deluxe 2000 which I got shortly before Robert got his unit. I experienced problems along the same line as Robert when I first got the flash. I asked for help here, and got a little, but I primarily had to experiment with the flash to discover how to use it. As you and Robert know, it takes time, of which there just isn't enough. In my case, it was complicated by the fact that my unit stopped working. I called your company, and your customer service was superb; you replaced the unit immediately, no hassle at all. I would not hesitate to recommend your company and your product.

However, I think that our experiences point to the need for somewhat better instructions in the use of your flash. Robert Niesen and I are not beginning photographers, yet our learning curves could have been shortened a great deal by better documentation. It doesn't have to be elaborate, or probably even camera-specific. But it meeds more than the small sheet you now provide.

I say this in the spirit of helping you to make a really good product--from a very responsive, service-oriented company--even better. Cheers.
 
Bob,

Does Jim work for SR Inc.? I certainly didn't pick up on that anywhere, but maybe you've dealt personally with him in the past.

I agree that the documentation with the flash is lacking. If nothing else, it would be nice if there was additional information on their website. I do also agree with you that I would not hesitate to recommend this company to anyone. They have been very responsive, and dealing with them has been a positive experience.

I do consider myself a beginning photographer, which is one reason I'm struggling so with issues like this. I'd pretty much just been using a point-and-shoot type camera for the last 8-9 years until I got my 880. I've got a Nikon FE2 that I used some before that which was given to me by my dad, but I never really scratched the surface of what I could do with it. This forum has been a godsend for someone like me, and since I got my 880 it has definitely given me a much greater interest in photography. I'm learning new stuff all the time, and it's been a lot of fun.

By the way, have you gotten your camera back from Nikon yet? If so, what did they do to it?

Have a good Memorial Day weekend.

Best regards,

Robert
Bob Morrison said:
Hi, Jim,
I also have an 880, along with a Digi-Slave Deluxe 2000 which I got
shortly before Robert got his unit. I experienced problems along
the same line as Robert when I first got the flash. I asked for
help here, and got a little, but I primarily had to experiment with
the flash to discover how to use it. As you and Robert know, it
takes time, of which there just isn't enough. In my case, it was
complicated by the fact that my unit stopped working. I called your
company, and your customer service was superb; you replaced the
unit immediately, no hassle at all. I would not hesitate to
recommend your company and your product.
However, I think that our experiences point to the need for
somewhat better instructions in the use of your flash. Robert
Niesen and I are not beginning photographers, yet our learning
curves could have been shortened a great deal by better
documentation. It doesn't have to be elaborate, or probably even
camera-specific. But it meeds more than the small sheet you now
provide.
I say this in the spirit of helping you to make a really good
product--from a very responsive, service-oriented company--even
better. Cheers.
Click to expand...
 
Jim,

I guess the description of my posting could reflect badly on the Digi-Slave products and was more of a statement, but that certainly wasn't my intent. I guess how I titled it was more of an attempt to elicit responses for help, particularly from Digi-Slave owners. Also, by reading my original posting one can see that it's obviously a plea for help and not me taking an opportunity to badmouth this company on a public forum. I've been very pleased with the service of this company.

I have been a bit surprised that there's still people making postings to this thread weeks later; but as far as I'm concerned, I considered my problem to be resolved. Admittedly I haven't really had an opportunity to put my flash to the test in a similar situation, but I have played around a little with it without recreating the problem; so I'm thinking it was due to weak batteries. I'll just have to hope the problem doesn't reoccur.

You're right that it does seem that using this flash would seem to be pretty cut-and-dried since it merely is triggered by the internal flash. However, that's also part of the problem with any slave flash. The camera does not control anything on the slave flash other than it triggering it, so the camera does not control the intensity of the flash, etc. That's where the guesswork comes in, and you just have to experiment with the flash and learn by trial-and-error. The Deluxe 2000 model I got has a switch that allows for four different levels of flash intensity, but you need to experiment to figure out which setting works best in each situation to get the correct exposure. I found that using the histogram feature on my 880 can help a lot with this. I did find that even on the lower flash intensity settings that I was sometimes overexposing when the subject was pretty close to me. That's when I had to play around with using it to bounce the flash, which is another nice feature of the Deluxe 2000 model since it does have a swivel head. Also, I'm definitely a beginning photographer, particularly when it comes to digital photography and using external flashes, so that makes it even more of a struggle for me. Finding the time to play around with all the features is also not easy. I guess I also need to experiment some with EV compensation and the speedlight adjustments, but right now that's a whole new concept to me. Thus, you can see that using this flash isn't necessarily real cut-and-dried. That being said, using it really can result in better photos.

I remember the posting that Frances did that you're talking about. I must agree that it wasn't really in the best of taste. I think that's just Frances though -- he seems to like to elicit responses.

The new Minolta does sound nice, but it's probably more camera than I need right now and definitely more bucks than I want to spend. I'm having a lot of fun with my 880 right now, and as I said above I'm still learning how to use it.

I'll go along with the legislation for longer days (as long as my kids also sleep longer) and higher pay. ;-)

By the way, the link to your website did not work for me. I was able to look at our bubble boy shot though. That was an interesting shot. Guess you had the cameral ready at just the right time.

Anyhow, hope there's no hard feelings. :o)

Take care, and have a good Memorial Day weekend.

Robert
jim kelly said:
Robert,

I admit that I am guilty of not reading all the posts but did read
several. You are correct is sensing my post had a slight tone. I
guess the title of your thread which to me was written not as a
request for help but as a statement was the cause and the fact that
the post was still going on fo so long withour complete resolution.

Oh yeah, I appreciate the offer to take care of your kids for a day
but I have my own (in fact one decided to throw up JELLO during the
night and now I can't get back to sleep so I figured I'd hit the
forums) and know what you mean about limited time. Let's co-write
some legislation that will mandate longer days :)

Also I guess I never expected to see a post concerning the issue
you have written about since this flash's only function is to fire
on the first or second flash.

The last time I wrote to this forum with a less than a
congratulatory message was when a guy (Frances) who regualrly posts
many nice pics, posted a spy type pic (he calls them candids) of a
heavy woman in a bathing suit at the beach which was done in a
quite unflattering way.

I've got an Olympus D340R, my pics are at http://www-jim-kelly.com

How about that Minolta D7, ain't she sweet? We will be seeing many
new 5+ MP digicams over the next few months I suppose. I will need
one, a new faster computerand a higher resolution printer. I need
some legislation that will mandate my employer pay me more so that
I can afford these things :)

Check out my latest masterpiece
users.erols.com/jamesgkelly/bubbleboy.jpg

Keep on posting!
Jim
Click to expand...
 
Jim,

Forgot to say this in my last posting, but I hope your kid's doing better. A sick kid in the middle of the night (or any time for that matter) is no fun.

Take care,

Robert
jim kelly said:
Robert,

I admit that I am guilty of not reading all the posts but did read
several. You are correct is sensing my post had a slight tone. I
guess the title of your thread which to me was written not as a
request for help but as a statement was the cause and the fact that
the post was still going on fo so long withour complete resolution.

Oh yeah, I appreciate the offer to take care of your kids for a day
but I have my own (in fact one decided to throw up JELLO during the
night and now I can't get back to sleep so I figured I'd hit the
forums) and know what you mean about limited time. Let's co-write
some legislation that will mandate longer days :)

Also I guess I never expected to see a post concerning the issue
you have written about since this flash's only function is to fire
on the first or second flash.

The last time I wrote to this forum with a less than a
congratulatory message was when a guy (Frances) who regualrly posts
many nice pics, posted a spy type pic (he calls them candids) of a
heavy woman in a bathing suit at the beach which was done in a
quite unflattering way.

I've got an Olympus D340R, my pics are at http://www-jim-kelly.com

How about that Minolta D7, ain't she sweet? We will be seeing many
new 5+ MP digicams over the next few months I suppose. I will need
one, a new faster computerand a higher resolution printer. I need
some legislation that will mandate my employer pay me more so that
I can afford these things :)

Check out my latest masterpiece
users.erols.com/jamesgkelly/bubbleboy.jpg

Keep on posting!
Jim
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top