"John Nichols" <[email protected]> declaimed the following: > I've been given a Canon PowerShot A620 which has a macro mode, > making it possible to take pictures of text that's clear enough to > be useful. I've tried this with a few things at home, but I'm > fairly certain (okay, hoping) that people here have some advice on > how to best use this feature when doing research. 7MP... You may not need macro mode... Back up and use the zoom to fill the LCD panel. With ~3000x2300 resolution, you have ~270DPI on an 11x8.5 page. "NLQ" on printers in the mid-80s was a mere 180DPI, and letter-quality laser printers were 300DPI. Macro, on these cameras, typically means focusing under 7-12 inches. Using wide-angle and macro means getting so close you get distortion -- the corners of a "page" (say) will look smaller than the center. Say 7 inches for example. From camera to center of page is 7". From center to corner is: sqrt((11 / 2) ^ 2 + (8.5 / 2) ^ 2) => 6.9" making camera to corner: sqrt(7 ^ 2 + 6.9 ^2) => 9.8". The corner is 40% further away from the camera, so the text near the corner will also look like it is 40% further away. OTOH; if the telephoto end of the zoom lets you back up to, say 20" for the same coverage, you get: sqrt(20 ^ 2 + 6.9 ^ 2) => 21.2, or a mere 5% distance increase. > Also, can anyone recommend a tripod that is rock solid stable in > order to eliminate camera shake when taking pictures in macro mode? What's your budget? (Actually if it is just document pages you intend to work with, a "copy stand" might be better). None of my tripods is really rated for the types of cameras I put on them, and mine are in the $100 range. http://www.adorama.com/SLU212D.html Prices have come down some... I paid more like $120 for a U112 15-years ago. However, of more use -- use the self-timer (or a remote; does the A620 have infra-red capability). -- bieber.genealogy Dennis Lee Bieber HTTP://home.earthlink.net/~bieber.genealogy/ Dennis Lee Bieber <[email protected]>

> > I've been given a Canon PowerShot A620 which has a macro mode, > > making it possible to take pictures of text that's clear enough to > > be useful. I've tried this with a few things at home, but I'm > > fairly certain (okay, hoping) that people here have some advice on > > how to best use this feature when doing research. > > > > Also, can anyone recommend a tripod that is rock solid stable in > > order to eliminate camera shake when taking pictures in macro mode? > > > > "John Nichols" <[email protected]> > > You don't just want one that's stable, you want one that can hold > the camera facing down, with legs that won't get into the picture. > The Powershot isn't that heavy, and if you use it with the 2 sec > delay shutter so there's no shake fro your touching it, it's > reasonably easy to get steady. In any case, a tripod can always be > made more stable by hanging a proportionately heavy beanbag from it > (I've even used my camera bag before now), but not many outside the > wildlife photography world can face down. You really need one with > a central pole that rotates, or a copy stand. > > I use a Benbo 1 http://www.patersonphotographic.com/tripods/ > benbo.html for copying stuff in my own archive if it's too big to go > on a copy stand, but would't dare take it into another archive - > it's very big and heavy (and intended for use with long tele lenses > for wildlife). With the Powershot, you'd probably get away with > their trekker or mini trekker. > > Other things to think about: > > If you use the flash, you get vignetting - a bright round zone and > darker at the edges. It's better to turn it off, but then remember > to check for shadows when using natural light. > > Camera shake. If you hand trigger the shutter (as opposed to a > remote release), you can get a small amount of vibration - as I > mentioned, use the delayed shutter release to give the vibration a > chance to die down and to let you get your hands well away (I had to > redo a set when working with a copy stand because it turned out that > a shadow that kept appearing was from my arm passing under one of > the lamps as the shutter went off. > > Remember that many libraries and archives will not appreciate you > arriving with a lot of camera gear - it's a good idea to call them > first. > > "Lesley Robertson" <[email protected]> Thanks, Lesley. To use the delay shutter feature, you select TV mode? (Not finding the manual's index that helpful.) And thanks to everyone else for their comments.

> Ron Parsons <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Edith Fensom <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The computer guy says my computer will run OSX but not well. It's > > > an imac that is almost 7 years old. It's time for a replacement. > > > Don't forget, it is profitable for a computer guy to give such > > advice. > > Maybe not. Not many non-apple resellers out there, she could just > have been getting honest advice. I'd look at it this way - if it's > a G4 iMac, it's perfectly fine for OSX (I'm sitting at one right now > and it meets my needs just fine). If it's a G3 iMac (the kind with > the CRT built in), then yes, OSX would be straining the system's > abilities, and unfair to the user. > > > My main computer for Genealogy use is a Pismo which is a G3 > > from 2000 and it has over 90,000 people on in and is quite > > satisfactory. > > Sure, but are you running OSX on it? If so, you'd be stunned by how > much difference it makes on, say, a $600.00 Mac Mini that you could > buy today. It comes down to how much slowness you can tolerate, or > something will change or break or not work on the old one that you > want to do, and _that_ is the time to upgrade. If OSX is the thing > she wants to do, and it's a G3, this might be the time. > > Dave Hinz <[email protected]> I'm running Panther on the Pismo. I sometimes move my database to the desktop and it is somewhat faster there, but other that waiting for a merger to take place, I don't really notice it. The desktop is a duel 2gig G5 with 2.5 gig memory. Ron Parsons <[email protected]>

Just got my A260 a couple of months ago and these last few days have used it to take pictures of old letters. With the macro on and the flash off, even the pencil written letters that were quite dim came through ok. Have a three section STITZ tripod T-90BX and it worked well. Had to put the camera at a little bit of an angle to get past the legs but it did not seem to distort the picture any. I am really enjoying the camera. Kay "Robert J. Harper" <[email protected]>

> can anyone recommend a tripod that is rock solid stable in > order to eliminate camera shake when taking pictures in macro mode? > > "John Nichols" <[email protected]> Can the camera take a cable release, or does it have a timed release? With either of those you don't need an extra-stable tripod. Dale H. Cook; Member, NEHGS and MA Society of Mayflower Descendants; Plymouth Co. MA Coordinator for the USGenWeb Project http://members.cox.net/plymouthcounty/index.shtml "Dale H. Cook" <[email protected]>

> > > > If you can run 9.2 on your computer, you should be able to run OSX > > > > as well with no need to upgrade. > > > > > > > > Ron Parsons <[email protected]> > > > > > > The computer guy says my computer will run OSX but not well. It's > > > an imac that is almost 7 years old. It's time for a replacement. > > > > > > Edith Fensom <[email protected]> > > > > Don't forget, it is profitable for a computer guy to give such > > advice. My main computer for Genealogy use is a Pismo which is a G3 > > from 2000 and it has over 90,000 people on in and is quite > > satisfactory. > > > > Ron Parsons <[email protected]> > > I realize that the computer guy is eager for me to buy a new > computer. I would need to add additional memory to my iMac before I > could install OX10. It's a personal choice but I feel that the > money would be better spent on a new computer. Besides, I want a > newer one. :-) > > Edith Fensom <[email protected]> When you get the new one, don't forget that you can boot one of the machines in disk mode and transfer any files quite quickly.

> I've been given a Canon PowerShot A620 which has a macro mode, > making it possible to take pictures of text that's clear enough to > be useful. I've tried this with a few things at home, but I'm > fairly certain (okay, hoping) that people here have some advice on > how to best use this feature when doing research. > > Also, can anyone recommend a tripod that is rock solid stable in > order to eliminate camera shake when taking pictures in macro mode? > > "John Nichols" <[email protected]> You don't just want one that's stable, you want one that can hold the camera facing down, with legs that won't get into the picture. The Powershot isn't that heavy, and if you use it with the 2 sec delay shutter so there's no shake fro your touching it, it's reasonably easy to get steady. In any case, a tripod can always be made more stable by hanging a proportionately heavy beanbag from it (I've even used my camera bag before now), but not many outside the wildlife photography world can face down. You really need one with a central pole that rotates, or a copy stand. I use a Benbo 1 http://www.patersonphotographic.com/tripods/ benbo.html for copying stuff in my own archive if it's too big to go on a copy stand, but would't dare take it into another archive - it's very big and heavy (and intended for use with long tele lenses for wildlife). With the Powershot, you'd probably get away with their trekker or mini trekker. Other things to think about: If you use the flash, you get vignetting - a bright round zone and darker at the edges. It's better to turn it off, but then remember to check for shadows when using natural light. Camera shake. If you hand trigger the shutter (as opposed to a remote release), you can get a small amount of vibration - as I mentioned, use the delayed shutter release to give the vibration a chance to die down and to let you get your hands well away (I had to redo a set when working with a copy stand because it turned out that a shadow that kept appearing was from my arm passing under one of the lamps as the shutter went off. Remember that many libraries and archives will not appreciate you arriving with a lot of camera gear - it's a good idea to call them first. Lesley Robertson "Lesley Robertson" <[email protected]>

Ye Old One wrote: > "Dr. Brian Leverich" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>And finally, I am always very wary about any organization/site >>>>>which Ancestry has its fingers in. >>>>> >>>>>[email protected] >>>> >>>>Bob- >>> >>> <snip> >>> >>>>However, you will probably find that most other people researching >>>>the surname will be reluctant to "donate" their research data to >>>>another person for what could be their personal gain. One thing >>>>about a company like Ancestry/RootsWeb that attracts contributors >>>>and posters on their lists is that the data they post there doesn't >>>>belong to the list "administrator" or the company--the AUP assures >>>>us all of that. The data you post to a RootsWeb mailing list >>>>remains the property of the author/poster who is merely giving >>>>permission for the company to house and archive the data for future >>>>researchers to find. >>>> >>>>Joan <[email protected]> >>> >>>Under international copyright laws what you say is true of ANY list >>>so stop being stupid. >>> >>>Ye Old One <[email protected]> >> >>Copyright law is almost entirely irrelevant with respect to *who* >>has *what* rights with respect to content posted at most non-hobby >>sites. > > Copyright always rests with the author, that is a matter of > international law. UNLESS the author assigns that copyright to someone else. You can assign your copyright intentionally for fee, or accidentally for free. You have to read the fine print *before* you upload anything. However, this is a peripheral issue, but by now I've lost track of what your original question _was_... Cheryl singhals <[email protected]>

John Nichols at [email protected] wrote: > I've been given a Canon PowerShot A620 which has a macro mode, > making it possible to take pictures of text that's clear enough to > be useful. I've tried this with a few things at home, but I'm > fairly certain (okay, hoping) that people here have some advice on > how to best use this feature when doing research. If, as you say, the text is clear enough, you may be able to use an OCR (optical character reader) program to convert the photo into usable text. > Also, can anyone recommend a tripod that is rock solid stable in > order to eliminate camera shake when taking pictures in macro mode? Vivitar makes several tripod models that are quite sturdy. My $0.02 is to head for a Photo store for this purchase. You will get better advice and a wider selection. Regards, Arnold -- <><><><><<><><><><><><> Arrowhead Images <[email protected] <><><><><<><><><><><><> I prefer the earth beneath my feet to be less TERRA and more FIRMA!

I've been given a Canon PowerShot A620 which has a macro mode, making it possible to take pictures of text that's clear enough to be useful. I've tried this with a few things at home, but I'm fairly certain (okay, hoping) that people here have some advice on how to best use this feature when doing research. Also, can anyone recommend a tripod that is rock solid stable in order to eliminate camera shake when taking pictures in macro mode? Thanks! "John Nichols" <[email protected]>

> Copyright always rests with the author, that is a matter of > international law. > > Ye Old One <[email protected]> Bob- What you don't seem to be grasping is the fact that we are talking about usage agreements. Terms you agree to when using a specific site--and these agreements can and sometimes do extend to transference of the author's copyright. Joan [email protected]

> Maybe not. Not many non-apple resellers out there, she could just > have been getting honest advice. I'd look at it this way - if it's > a G4 iMac, it's perfectly fine for OSX (I'm sitting at one right now > and it meets my needs just fine). If it's a G3 iMac (the kind with > the CRT built in), then yes, OSX would be straining the system's > abilities, and unfair to the user. > > > My main computer for Genealogy use is a Pismo which is a G3 > > from 2000 and it has over 90,000 people on in and is quite > > satisfactory. > > Sure, but are you running OSX on it? If so, you'd be stunned by how > much difference it makes on, say, a $600.00 Mac Mini that you could > buy today. It comes down to how much slowness you can tolerate, or > something will change or break or not work on the old one that you > want to do, and _that_ is the time to upgrade. If OSX is the thing > she wants to do, and it's a G3, this might be the time. > > Dave Hinz <[email protected]> It is a G3 iMac with DVD player that came out in 1999. If I didn't have broadband I probably would have upgraded by now. I'm running out of space on the hard drive too. Reunion 8 works fine on it but I can't upgrade Internet Explorer until I go to OSX and some sites don't work well with my version of IE. It is time to upgrade. The Mac salesman told me his mom had tried OSX on her iMac and it didn't work well. I felt like he was being honest with me. Edith Edith Fensom <[email protected]>

"Dr. Brian Leverich" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > And finally, I am always very wary about any organization/site > > > > which Ancestry has its fingers in. > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > Bob- > > > > > <snip> > > > > > However, you will probably find that most other people researching > > > the surname will be reluctant to "donate" their research data to > > > another person for what could be their personal gain. One thing > > > about a company like Ancestry/RootsWeb that attracts contributors > > > and posters on their lists is that the data they post there doesn't > > > belong to the list "administrator" or the company--the AUP assures > > > us all of that. The data you post to a RootsWeb mailing list > > > remains the property of the author/poster who is merely giving > > > permission for the company to house and archive the data for future > > > researchers to find. > > > > > > Joan <[email protected]> > > > > Under international copyright laws what you say is true of ANY list > > so stop being stupid. > > > > Ye Old One <[email protected]> > > Copyright law is almost entirely irrelevant with respect to *who* > has *what* rights with respect to content posted at most non-hobby > sites. Copyright always rests with the author, that is a matter of international law. > Almost all non-hobby sites have a "Terms of Service" or "Acceptable > Use Policy" or some other agreement that binds them and their users. Which may, or may not be enforcable dependant on the law in the area where the contract is deemed to be made (which is not always where the site may claim it is made). > For example, GenForum has long been known to have one of the most > user-unfriendly AUPs in the business. It includes little gems like: > > A. Subject to the Genealogy.com Privacy Policy, by inputting, > uploading or posting any family tree information, data, family > stories, ideas, drawings, opinions, messages, eyewitness accounts, > or any other information or materials, or engaging in any other form > of communication (each, a "Submission") through the Sites, you grant > MyFamily.com, Inc. and its Affiliated Companies a royalty free, > irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, unrestricted, transferable, > worldwide license to (i) use, copy, sublicense, adapt, transmit, > distribute, publicly perform, archive, and display any such > Submission in any medium now known or hereafter developed; (ii) > exploit any proprietary rights in such Submission, including but not > limited to rights under copyright, trademark, or patent laws in any > relevant jurisdiction; and (iii) sublicense to third parties the > unrestricted right to exercise any of the foregoing rights. > > Basically, by posting to GenForum you have given up all rights to > your work other than exclusivity. And the degree to which that can be enforced depends on a number of factors. > So, circling all the way around, Joan did tell you something useful. Nothing whatsoever, the comments were both useless and insulting. They were also, as I said, rubbish. > You, of course, can craft whatever kind of AUP you want if you're > operating the server. (: Not drafting any, none needed. > Cheers, B. -- Bob. Ye Old One <[email protected]>

Ron Parsons <[email protected]> wrote: > > Edith Fensom <[email protected]> wrote: > > The computer guy says my computer will run OSX but not well. It's > > an imac that is almost 7 years old. It's time for a replacement. > Don't forget, it is profitable for a computer guy to give such > advice. Maybe not. Not many non-apple resellers out there, she could just have been getting honest advice. I'd look at it this way - if it's a G4 iMac, it's perfectly fine for OSX (I'm sitting at one right now and it meets my needs just fine). If it's a G3 iMac (the kind with the CRT built in), then yes, OSX would be straining the system's abilities, and unfair to the user. > My main computer for Genealogy use is a Pismo which is a G3 > from 2000 and it has over 90,000 people on in and is quite > satisfactory. Sure, but are you running OSX on it? If so, you'd be stunned by how much difference it makes on, say, a $600.00 Mac Mini that you could buy today. It comes down to how much slowness you can tolerate, or something will change or break or not work on the old one that you want to do, and _that_ is the time to upgrade. If OSX is the thing she wants to do, and it's a G3, this might be the time. Dave Hinz <[email protected]>

> So, circling all the way around, Joan did tell you something useful. > You, of course, can craft whatever kind of AUP you want if you're > operating the server. (: > > Cheers, B. <[email protected]> Yes---and it was MY assumption (perhaps incorrectly so) that Bob understood this and that this was the very reason he'd want his mailing list under his own control as opposed to being user friendly, hosted in a place like RootsWeb. Joan [email protected]

> Under international copyright laws what you say is true of ANY list > so stop being stupid. > > Bob <[email protected]> Bob- Mailing lists on Yahoo and various other servers where you are the "creator" of the list and "own" the list DO grant you the rights as a listowner that I previously stated. I've been there and been the victim of a list "owner" under their system. If you create a Yahoo list and you ever wish to kill the list and destroy the data and have all the archives removed -- you can do it -- whether the people who entrusted their data to your list and archiving approved of it or not. And once the archived messages are gone, if the list "owner" has copied the data for his own use--he can reuse it and in most cases you could never prove it was your original data. Been there and had that happen. This is one of the major differences between having a "listowner" and personally created list such as the Yahoogroup lists and having a genealogy list that you "admin" at RootsWeb. At least it is a difference from the standpoint of the people who post to such a list--they can be assured that the administrator is merely that--a list caretaker -- and not someone who has the sole right to remove and kill the data they've entrust to the list and the archiving system. Joan [email protected]

> > > And finally, I am always very wary about any organization/site > > > which Ancestry has its fingers in. > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > Bob- > > > <snip> > > > However, you will probably find that most other people researching > > the surname will be reluctant to "donate" their research data to > > another person for what could be their personal gain. One thing > > about a company like Ancestry/RootsWeb that attracts contributors > > and posters on their lists is that the data they post there doesn't > > belong to the list "administrator" or the company--the AUP assures > > us all of that. The data you post to a RootsWeb mailing list > > remains the property of the author/poster who is merely giving > > permission for the company to house and archive the data for future > > researchers to find. > > > > Joan <[email protected]> > > Under international copyright laws what you say is true of ANY list > so stop being stupid. > > Ye Old One <[email protected]> Copyright law is almost entirely irrelevant with respect to *who* has *what* rights with respect to content posted at most non-hobby sites. Almost all non-hobby sites have a "Terms of Service" or "Acceptable Use Policy" or some other agreement that binds them and their users. For example, GenForum has long been known to have one of the most user-unfriendly AUPs in the business. It includes little gems like: A. Subject to the Genealogy.com Privacy Policy, by inputting, uploading or posting any family tree information, data, family stories, ideas, drawings, opinions, messages, eyewitness accounts, or any other information or materials, or engaging in any other form of communication (each, a "Submission") through the Sites, you grant MyFamily.com, Inc. and its Affiliated Companies a royalty free, irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, unrestricted, transferable, worldwide license to (i) use, copy, sublicense, adapt, transmit, distribute, publicly perform, archive, and display any such Submission in any medium now known or hereafter developed; (ii) exploit any proprietary rights in such Submission, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, or patent laws in any relevant jurisdiction; and (iii) sublicense to third parties the unrestricted right to exercise any of the foregoing rights. Basically, by posting to GenForum you have given up all rights to your work other than exclusivity. So, circling all the way around, Joan did tell you something useful. You, of course, can craft whatever kind of AUP you want if you're operating the server. (: Cheers, B. -- Dr. Brian Leverich <[email protected]> Co-moderator, soc.genealogy.methods/GENMTD-L Co-founder, www.RootsWeb.com, the Net's largest genealogical community Co-founder, www.Linkpendium.com, the Net's largest genealogical directory Author of RootsWeb's original AUP

> > And finally, I am always very wary about any organization/site > > which Ancestry has its fingers in. > > > > [email protected] > > Bob- > > I think what you really seem to be saying is that you wish to OWN > your list and wish to be able to kill it, claim the data as your > own, and have complete control over it. That is your privilege. Don't talk rubbish. > However, you will probably find that most other people researching > the surname will be reluctant to "donate" their research data to > another person for what could be their personal gain. One thing > about a company like Ancestry/RootsWeb that attracts contributors > and posters on their lists is that the data they post there doesn't > belong to the list "administrator" or the company--the AUP assures > us all of that. The data you post to a RootsWeb mailing list > remains the property of the author/poster who is merely giving > permission for the company to house and archive the data for future > researchers to find. > > Joan <[email protected]> Under international copyright laws what you say is true of ANY list so stop being stupid. -- Bob. Ye Old One <[email protected]>

> > > If you can run 9.2 on your computer, you should be able to run OSX > > > as well with no need to upgrade. > > > > > > Ron Parsons <[email protected]> > > > > The computer guy says my computer will run OSX but not well. It's > > an imac that is almost 7 years old. It's time for a replacement. > > > > Edith Fensom <[email protected]> > > Don't forget, it is profitable for a computer guy to give such > advice. My main computer for Genealogy use is a Pismo which is a G3 > from 2000 and it has over 90,000 people on in and is quite > satisfactory. > > Ron Parsons <[email protected]> I realize that the computer guy is eager for me to buy a new computer. I would need to add additional memory to my iMac before I could install OX10. It's a personal choice but I feel that the money would be better spent on a new computer. Besides, I want a newer one. :-) Edith Edith Fensom <[email protected]>

> > If you can run 9.2 on your computer, you should be able to run OSX > > as well with no need to upgrade. > > > > Ron Parsons <[email protected]> > >The computer guy says my computer will run OSX but not well. It's >an imac that is almost 7 years old. It's time for a replacement. > > Edith Fensom <[email protected]> Don't forget, it is profitable for a computer guy to give such advice. My main computer for Genealogy use is a Pismo which is a G3 from 2000 and it has over 90,000 people on in and is quite satisfactory.