collin, you are a troll and a moron. shut up.
and i am with lasse -- your sig had no place in pdlm.
mishka
-Original Message-
From: "Collin Brendemuehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<...>
was this a discussion from a different list?
speaking of the subj, apparently, the "shallow DOF" term
doesn't apply only to lenses.
mishka
> > Fra: "Collin Brendemuehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > DagT:
> > Yes, he is a Marxist. An avid follower of Hitler & Stalin.
From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > One question though - I am going to have to work with my lens
> > stopped down due to the excess light. Probably in the realm
> > of f16. This totally sucks for portraiture as it increa
The "reduced" algorithm, from the FAQ is fairly simple:
1. Transform the image into a suitable color space.
2. (Optional -- omitted)
3. Group the pixel values for each component into 8x8 blocks. Transform each
8x8 block through a discrete cosine transform
4. In each block, divide each of the
The "usual" JPEG (not JPEG2000) is indeed 24 bit format, 8 bits/color.
I have never heard of printers (non-exotic) that would print
16 bit/color. So printing JPEG would give you an image as good as it gets.
Of course, assuming you are not talking about JPEG artifacts here.
OTOH, if you edit your
what kind of trackball? wired, wireless? optical?
i have a wireless optical from logitech, and that kind
of behavior usually means that my receiving base cannot get
the signal.
home this helps
mishka
-Original Message-
From: "Mubeen Noorbhai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
D
those are design issues, and size is one of the constraints.
mx and me-s are of the same size, but their design differs quite a bit,
so you are in effect saying: those small buttons on me-s are because the
camera is too small (*)! but those small buttons are only one possible
solution, as mx shows
hey, you can always send your files to india... or, wherever
all techies will be, at that time.
mishka
-Original Message-
From: "Jostein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> That's true. Let's hope that people like John Francis still hang around by
> then...:-)
this has probably been discussed to death before, but
what's the reason to use chromogenic bw? if you take a color
negative film, and print on bw paper, wouldn't it give you the
same result? am i missing something very basic here?
best,
mishka
-Original Message-
From: "Peter J. Alling" <[
i scanned a few rolls of BW (some tmax100, some trix, some really old svema) on the
nikon --
apart from the fact that ice is not working with it, i couldn't see anything to
complain about.
just make sure you save and edit all in 16 bit mode, otherwise all you'll have is 256
shades of grey.
mi
-Original Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Hi Nick In what way was the Minolta "rubbish?" Have
> you scanned B&W negs with either?
I also used CoolScan 4000 for almost 2 years, and Minolta Scan Multi II
for a few months. I might have had a defective unit, but Mi
From: Steve Jolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Sigma have already made a full-frame 12-24mm zoom - a 10mm prime sounds
> tricky but not impossible in my decidedly unexpert opinion :-)
Have you used it? Neither have I. Mostly, because I haven't seen a single review,
saying that it's any good at 12mm.
maybe it's just because i have never used a lab where you worked at :)
mishka
-Original Message-
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Funny thing about that is that in the labs i have worked at, if the
> negative came in sharp, the print from it would leave sharp.
i am wondering how many people here are regularly reading /. ?
best,
mishka
-Original Message-
From: "Amita Guha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:10:51 -0500
Subject: Photographer a Week: Chernobyl
>
> This woman lives not to far from Chernobyl, an
> From: edwin
>
> I think the answer is that the DA lenses are smaller than they would be if
> they were not DA. Does anybody make a 16-45 that covers 35mm format?
> Sigma's 15-35 is not exactly small.
by the same reasoning lenses in 35mm format and, say, 6x6, covering the same angle,
should be
what made you change your mind?
still naively thinking --
mishka
> I was living in Texas
> at the time and still thought marguerites in bulk
> was a good idea.
>
> Steven Desjardins
cotty,
thanx -- although i would be a tiny bit happier if
that were coming from tanya
mishka
> >mishka
>
> Too damned good-looking !
man... i thought i invented it, when i had my third
one this summer
anyway, happy birthday, tanya!
mishka
> Could be worse. Next August is my second annual 29th
> birthday. I'm still in denial...
>
> -Mat
here we go:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=136649&size=lg
best,
mishka
> Nah, this is not nice, it s great. I just got back
> from St. Petersburg and this is better than the city
> itself ;-)
thanks, Raimo. i have very mixed feelings about this
city. the locals tend to think it's the most beautiful
place on earth. but when i visit it it usually takes
me a few days
> The problem is that PayPal instituted this policy
> without notification.
This is of course is a serious problem, no matter
whether the policy change itself is good or bad. I
guess I misread your original posting.
Best,
Mishka
This is totally stupid to blame a business for
covering itself from online fraud liabilities! Guess
what: if were there no fraud, there wouldn't have been
this issue either.
They provide a service, with nothing coming close
in terms of cost and convenience. I suppose, they run
into problems w
10.2 MPixels...
i am wondering how long before their marketoids start
calling it 40.8 MPixels (after all, one *could*
interpolate around the pixels oh wait, why stop at
40.8? let's call it 160!)
sheesh...
mishka
2x converter lets 1/4 light through. Therefore,
your lens should be at f/5.6 instead of f/11
Best,
mishka
> If i'm reading say, 1/250 f 11,what do i set the
> lens at.If the converter is letting in 1/2 the light
> as Tom R mentioned,it is now an F8 lens,so should i
> set the aperature ring on
well, i suppose, for printing uncropped images at 8x10,
6M of RGB pixels is as goot as it gets. but i don't
now any digicam capable of that. yet.
but if anyone still shoots B&W film... a 6MP digicam has exactly 2M of pixels of each
color. iow, with a
red filter on (not that uncommon i suppose, o
I'll quote this to the judge at my ticket hearing
in a couple of weeks -- 80 mph: "Yor Hono(u)r, but this
is what this has been design for, dammit!".
If it works and he lets me off the hook (not to
mention the $200 ticket), I'll even agree with
the "low-cost option" part.
mishka
> Highway Syst
Now I feel sooo much better (although, in my case,
definitely the reverse is true)
I guess, the ideal ad would show a scantily clad girl
trying an *istD and a scantily clad guy holding a bunch
of FA* lenses (the big ones, to really get the message
across) for her. For the precious moments indeed
i don't know much about *cAmpatibility* (i suppose
that has something to do with camps and campari?), but
the rest is BS, be it USA or not.
mishka
> I don't like all this whining on the
> list re non-A lenses. If you haven't bought a new
> lens since 1981, you are not keeping Pentax in
> bus
> > a $8000 PC from 20 years ago would still run its
> > original software just fine, and is screen would
> > still show those gorgeous 4 shades of green...
>
> And you just compared the computer equivalent of
> rubbing two sticks together or using a Zippo to
> start a campfire.
>
> William Ro
let me know when you decide to ditch those. i will
gladly accept a donation, cost free for you.
i don't have any problem whatsoever justifying the
primes. especially the fast ones and the macros.
mishka
-Original Message-
> Once you get a hold of a high quality 80-200 F2.8
> lens, it'
> it would replace my 200m f/2.8 (any interest?).
you bet!
mishka
then why not just short it on the body, permanently?
mishka
> It doesn't know what kind of lens is present, but it
> knows that the "A"
> pin isn't shorted they way it should be. The camera
> doesn't care if this
> is because you have a K/M lens mounted or if you are
> using an "A" lens
> with
sucks!
here goes my hope of scanning MF on a budget.
i sold nikon 4000 this summer and got this instead,
and it's been an excercise in frustration ever since.
the resolution (1180dpi) is ok for my purposes. but
pretty much everything else is horrible. the minolta
software is lousy, it does horri
Not sure about Lazlo, but I liked the shot a lot.
The geometry, the balance of the umbrella and
its shadow, the position of the figures, symmetric
wrt to the shadow, but not the umbrella -- it all
works wonderfully, for my taste.
best,
mishka
> Lazlo Moholy Nagy, maybe?
> Regards
>
> Albano
To RFsing:
> The point of view Miska continues to demonstrate is
> deplorable. If he can't adapt his beliefs and
> attitudes to this country, perhaps he should return
> to a government and political system he is more
> comfortable with. We won't miss him here...
"We" -- like "We,
Ditto!
Looking forward to a "Married an proud of it!" thread
Best,
Mishka
been there this spring. couldn't agree more with you. i still cry whenever i remeber
this 30-cents-a-beer city.
best,
mishka
Maybe I need to see a shrink, but if you saw me mentioning the focal length, I suggest
you re-read
my message and keep your imagination in check.
I was talking about *dimensions*:
d has dimensions of *length* (m, yards, leagues)
c has dimensions of *length* (mm, inches, miles, a.e)
m is dimensio
> > Get a Mac.
>
> Get a life.
... Get a job. Get a career. Get a family. Get a $%^& big television...
Mishka
dude, are you implying someone should start bombing DC?
hold your horses!
mishka
From: Dan Matyola
> It will go on until allthe terrorists and brutal
> dictators have no place to hide . . .
yup.
for President of Iraq. where people would be able to
fully appreciate the finer points of his wit.
mishka
> Tony Blair for President :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Cotty
That depends on what do you intend to use it for.
For "general purpose photography" (which probably means, if one midrange zoom is
enough and ISO400 and higher is not required), high end digicams are pretty good.
I'd say, go for it, for under $400 one can get a very decent 4MP one. Canon G2 com
althought i had an argument with keith, i do agree with him here: no one made any
comments "at the kids expense", you might want to re-read the messages. this
kind of accusations is waaay overboard!
now *you* are trying to push the buttons. we have dropped the public dicussion here
yesterday, so
Don't be cheap and get (stainless) Hewes reels (e.g
from Adorama). I have learned the lesson the hard way,
ruining a few rolls, complaining to the world how
stainless reels suck, then, buying one of these
beauties -- and I have never been happier. Loading a
Hewes 35mm reel is completely fool-p
i have bought some used stuff from them. their ratings are pretty much what they say
-- if it's "ex-", it's not "ex" and you'll notice that, which may not be the case with
keh.
i had no disappointments so far. they have been helpful over the phone whenever i had
questions/problems, and there's
buy a better back ($4500) without having to change your SLR ($1000)?
is it me or does it sound like "buy a better camera without having to change
neck-strap"?
mishka
> From: "whickersworld"
> Subject: Re: Leica R9/R8 digital back
>
> I think you've completely overlooked the enormous
> benefit
I expect to treat digital as a new format. When the time comes, I will by a DSLR from
whoever makes the one that fits my needs.
Right now I don't see myself buying a DSLR for a couple of years no matter what -- the
technology is still very immature. I have a digicam (Canon G2) for the time being
Around $50 for M 135/3.5. I had mine for $35 (off ebay) like new, together with case
(it's not like new anymore :)
Good travel lens: very small, very light, integrated (although short) hood.
Mishka
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: "Cheap" 135mm lens?
>
> Any thoughts on how much a decent (cl
Woa! Hold it man!
It's the other way around: most good P&S would let you shoot pics as good as any SLR.
And the last crop of midrange SLRs (Maxxum 7, F100, MZ-S) are fantastic cameras in
every respect.
Mishka
> It's not only the small film format. It's also that
> the quality of 35mm SLRs (and
manuals are definitely the last thing anyone gives sh*t about. people don't pay money
for manuals, they pay for features.
mishka
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:18:24 -0400
> From: Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: *ist D revisited
>
> Did *you* do the technical writing, or just watched
>
This is really sad. Maxxum 7 is a fantastic piece of engineering with nothing coming
even close in that price range. I know, I used to have one.
Mishka
> Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Peter Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Question on Pentax Lineup
>
> I also heard
TED]>
> Subject: Re: OT: 2 articles from the washington post
>
> what is the file size of the raw image?
>
> Herb...
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mike Ignatiev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > IIRC, canon raw files are just that -- 10 (or 12)
Adorama and B&H sell new ones for something like $150. I have one and am very happy
with it.
Mishka
> From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: *ist SLR and K-mount lenses
>
> about meters and two good options are the Sekonic
> L308BII and Gossen Gossen Luna Pro digital. If you
For the web, any macro lens should do. Better yet, digicam.
What size are the diamonds? say, X inches. So it should be 10*X inches on the screen.
A typical screen has circa 75 dpi, which means the diamond should be 750*X pixels. A
1:4 macro will be 0.25*X on the film, and scan with 3000dpi will
I wish I were that lucky...
Mishka
> Do bad things come in threes too?
> Got dumped last weekend.
Ok, I will be more specific about my KEH repairs experience (which happened about a
month ago). My MX had two problems:
1. lousy meter (inaccurate and drained batteries)
2. focusing -- what I saw in focus on the GG wasn't on the film.
I have contacted them (i.e. KEH) and asked if they can take
you may also want to try a (cheap) rangefinder. the lack of mirror and bright
viewfinder may buy you a couple of stops -- more than you'll ever get from slr, no
matter how much money you throw into it.
best,
mishka
I can only recommend to stay away from KEH repairs. On the expensive side and very
unprofessional. Not to mention they didn't repair the problems that I have explicitely
listed, in TWO attempts (yes, that was an MX, still waiting for repair).
Mishka
Ranked by frequency of use it's:
1. 50mm/1.7 -- all-purpose, light and fast
2. 16mm/2.8 fisheye -- *really* wide (think a cathedral top to bottom from across the
street). besides, i do like the distortion
3. 24mm/2.8 -- just wide and very rectangular
4. 135mm/3.5 -- portraits and whenever i want t
Not much, unless we are talking about P67. It would have been much more on topic if he
were driving Honda Civic (with the aforementioned ME-Super).
Good luck to you, Greywolf, keep the journal updates!
Best,
Mishka
> From: Andreas Wirtz
> Subject: Re: Moving on!
>
Frantisek,
I have 803 (two pockets in front), and the first thing I got for it was 3 compartment
padded insert. LX + 50/1.4 fits the middle compartment with no problems. Not sure
about the winder -- I rarely carry it (usually there's enough stuff packed without it
to make my back sore by the end
that was exactly my sentiment. too.
mishka
> sigh-
>
> Y'know, its sobering when you see others' "cliche"
> shots are not only the same things you've taken and
> really liked on your own, but are better than
> yours, too.
I am not sure if this has been already answered, but VueScan supports tons of scanners
under Linux and OSX, including Firewire NikonScan 4000ED.
OTOH, the last time I checked, XSane was a joke (a year ago).
Picture Window Pro supposedly supports 16 bit editing on anything (where anything ==
Wi
Frantisek,
I have a F-803, and it is by far my favorite bag. I have replaced the insert, now it
has 3 padded compartments, and I usually pack there an LX, 2-3 extra lenses, meter and
a Bogen table top tripod. The middle compartment is large enough to fit vertically LX
with 50mm mounted or a rol
WOW! Mounting a lens on a DSLR automatically increases the filter size of the lens...
Best,
Mishka
> My new(to me) FA 75mm f1.4 for the *ist D.
This must be a typo -- should read "He's"
Subject: Re: It's Coming
-
>It's
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Coming.
I used to have a p6x7, but sold it last year.
The answer really depends on what you plan it to use for. Do you need AF and
automation? Is weight a factor? How big a tripod do you want to carry? Metal or
plastic? Price? Do you need zooms? Do you care for a lot of primes? Do you prefer
square or
mike,
a very arrogant, pretentious, misinformed and, not the least, misleading remark on
your part.
ok, i'll stop here, rather than telling what i really think about it.
mishka
> Just be aware that these Eastern European, old
> Soviet, and Chinese films are made with no
> environmental contr
No, I don't.
...but WHY???
Mishka
> Anybody know of somebody selling Svema film in North > America?
got this book, "Rodchenko, photography 1924-1954", from publisher overstock. one word
-- "WOW!". spent the whole evening looking at his photos, my jaw all the way down on
the floor. best $20 i have ever spent.
mishka
if one shoots the "Black Square" painting, i bet, monochrome CGA (320x240) resolution
would give the close to optimal results: no grain, very smooth black on very snow like
white...
resolution is not everything!
than again, if one shoots only a fragment of that picture, a simple copy of /dev/nul
Just picked up at /. -- some guys came up with really black black stuff, reflecting 10
to 20 times less than the usual black paint used in optical devices.
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_747664.html?menu=news
To make it relevant to the list, just imagine how nice would have been to have SM
Rob,
can you please point me to where i could get one for that much money (that is, under
2k)?
mishka
> Yep, his scanner only provides 3200 dpi at MF, it
> may have cost a bunch when he
> bought it but they are selling for well under 2k
M135/3.5? that's one of my all time favs!
mishka
it sounds *very* logical: "three" is a noun/object here, and as objects, "three"-s are
definitely not countable -- how many different "three"-s you can come up with? paul
stregevsky mentioned a very good rule to see if this is a "mass" noun -- can you put
"a" before it? "a three"? -- from which
No problem.
Nero has a component called "virtual image drive", or something like this. I have
5.5.x and 5.9.x and both have it. Install it. It will create a bogus CDROM device.
Then you can run this "virtual drive" utility (it would appear someone in the Nero
folder) and point it to your *real*
has anyone tried to used this combo?
i had picked up one on sale (logitech optical wireless, a big marble on top) to
replace my old mouse. so far it's a challenge for me to even cut and paste text,
although i expect that this will improve. the big question is, is it suitable for
photo editing?
actually, it worked for me.
i bought a "NIB" FA-1W finder from team-photo.de, and (eventually) got a used FA-1.
granted, it took almost a year and it was quite a hassle, but in the end i did cash a
check a month ago. of course, minus deductible -- but on the bright side, i got to
keep the finde
Pal,
If you meant this, I would subscribe to every single word of this statement, including
punctuation marks.
Pity you didn't -- but it still summarizes it very nicely. That's the definition of
art, be it photography, music or mathematics. That's it --- no rules, lifetime of
frustration and a f
Subj. to everyone here!
i don't make any enlargements larger than 11x14, and even those on very rear occasions
(which means i did it twice in my lifetime). do i need the resolution of 100MP camera?
you bet!
on my computer screen, i can use all the resolusion i can get, as long as i can zoom
in and out. i don't care a
Dear Sir:
To support the upcoming Pentax DSLR release, I enclose
$50___$100 $6000__
Please send me the free T-Shirt and my PDML membership for the next year.
best,
mishka
> From: Brad Dobo
> Subject: Hypothetical Question taken further...
> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:51:11 -0800
>
i had both -- they were identical (maybe, apart from coating).
mishka
> From: Anton Browne
> Subject: K & A 24mm f2.8 the same?
> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:58:43 -0800
>
> -
>
> The K and A 24mm lenses are the same are they not?
> Apart from appearance.
>
> Thanks
depends on what you are shooting. i am pretty sure that with anything color, 4000dpi
is as high as it is makes sense to go (and very rarely).
b&w is a different story though -- tmax100 seems to have frightening high res
(although i don't have a lot of experience with it).
best,
mishka
> I can
I am, for one, would be glad to see the new lenses, as long as Pentax continues the
backward-compatibility with the old ones. I want to use the old lenses on DSLR. Not
the new ones on LX.
Faec it, it's like complaining that 35mm lenses don't cover the whole 6x7 circle. Who
gives?
Besides, a p
Katrin,
check out ebay store MoscowGifts4U. I have bought a couple of lenses from the guy, he
ships from Ukraine and he's a nice seler. Got the fisheye rom him for $120 (IIRC) --
fantastic lens. Especially, considering that Photoshop can get rid of fisheye effect,
making this one hell of a v
I saw a Beattie screen for Hassy. To put it mildly -- a piece of crap: next to
impossible to focus on plain matte field.
The new screens for LX OTOH are fantastic, fit both LX and MX and can be had for under
$30 on Ebay.
Best,
Mishka
> From: Rob Brigham
> Subject: Query for a friend...
What a nonsense!
Maybe not as smooth as Ks and Ms (and my A24 and K24 are *almost* equally smooth -- if
there is a difference, it's too subtle to matter), I still find the build quality of
As pretty high by any standard.
> The "A" lens with its typical, tacky 1970s design
> style is pretty che
the simple rule i've learned after a similar ordeal: if in doubt, use a p&s. no one
gives a damn about "just another tourist". the second you grab an slr (or, heaven
forbid tripod and a MF outfit) all the hell breaks loose.
best,
mishka.
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: OT: Whining about "
Chris,
It's not that easy for me:
I am not sure I care much for 24/2 for several reasons
-- it's twice as big and heavy
-- it uses 67 filters (IIRC)
-- it has longer min focusing distance
-- I am not sure that f/2 is a real advantage over f/2.8: I don't have trouble
focusing, and being 24mm, it'
I have managed to sort out my email problems, so I'm back.
Now, if someone could help me to make a tough decision... Here's the story: I have two
24/2.8 lenses and one has got to go. But I have trouble deciding which one. They are
SMC-A 24/2.8 and SMC-K 24/2.8, both mint cometically and mechanic
...or, to pay ebay fee
-Original Message-
From: Brendan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 13:44:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: anyone care to bid? :)
>
> WOW!!!
>
> now my question is who has that much cash laying
> around to buy it all ?
>
>
Dun't know about downloadtimes, but comparing images "side by side" is nonsense: just
get a dual (or more) BIG (21") monitor setup and say goodbye to light table. In fact,
on the screen one can see a few images magnified at the same time -- try that with
slides!
He's either fond of loupes, or h
what the serial # on the LX?
mishka
-Original Message-
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:24:05 -0400
Subject: FS: LX and more
>
> Seeing as how we were having List problems on Friday and I wasn't sure
> whether stuff was going
Guys,
Have anyone tried these scanners? I am curious how it stacks up against Epson? The
optical resolution (spec) here is <1200dpi, so I am curious, even at $800, is it worth
it?
Mishka
> From: "mike wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: OT-MF & 35mm scanners, cheap.
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
>
My SO has a PhD, works at Harvard and cannot imagine herself with web access slower
than 1Mbps, so she's not exactly technophobic.
Now, when it comes to pictures, she gets mad if I just develop and scan the weekend
snapshots, instead of giving her 4x6s she can put in her album. Even the $3 vs
agree. money is definitely one of them :)
mishka
-Original Message-
From: "Robert Soames Wetmore"
Subject: Re: OT: D1s review
>
> >I don't see how anyone could conclude that 35mm film is still a >superior
> >media after seeing these pictures.
> >
> >-R [Ryan K. Brooks]
>
> Maybe beca
tude. I have yet to see a digicam
> with the wide exposure lattitude of negative film. Possibly 'narrow'
> slides, although I think provia is reasonably 'wide', so if the D1s can
> match that it aint bad.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From:
i have always thought that it's rather client's right to specify what they want (pay
for!), rather than employee's. i mean, i can almost see it: i'm telling our clients,
"listen, windows sucks, here's the program for Irix that's far more appropriate for
what you are doing..."
oh well...
mishka
If he accepts escrow (and, preferably, pays for it too).
Mishka
-Original Message-
From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 17:01:30 +0100
Subject: OT: eBay shadyness
>
> Would *you* bid on this?!
>
> http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISA
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
