Question:

Greetings all – I’m considering an online school to get a Master’s in Accounting.  This would be a career change and would have to be online because of my location.  I’m interested in the forensic/audit aspect, so I’ve looked at Florida Atlantic’s program.  I’m also interested in the Keller graduate program in accounting. I’ve got a liberal arts Master’s, and 2 years of a JD, so completing the coursework doesn’t concern me.  I’ve also taken two basic accounting classes so I could make sure it interests me, and it does. Questions: Do either of the two programs mentioned raise any concerns?  Online programs in general ? The Florida Atlantic program seems to be very Forensic specific, while the Keller program seems to give a very solid foundation in fundamental accounting.  I’m afraid the depth of the Florida Atlantic program would be at the sacrifice of some breadth of core accouting. Anybody from Santa Rosa, CA or north looking for a midlife accounting rookie with too much education ? Thanks for any help or insight you can provide. Ziphius

Response:

You would do better to try and get a CPA and CFE if you are looking for a career change. Most firms look for recruits with a prospectus for the CPA. The MAcc is just a little bonus selling point. You need to check the stringent guidelines for CA about what courses you need to have to sit for the CPA. Chances are you are looking at more schooling than you think. Janice

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Greetings all – I’m considering an online school to get a Master’s in Accounting.  This would be a career change and would have to be online because of my location. I’m interested in the forensic/audit aspect, so I’ve looked at Florida Atlantic’s program.  I’m also interested in the Keller graduate program in accounting. I’ve got a liberal arts Master’s, and 2 years of a JD, so completing the coursework doesn’t concern me.  I’ve also taken two basic accounting classes so I could make sure it interests me, and it does. Questions: Do either of the two programs mentioned raise any concerns?  Online programs in general ? The Florida Atlantic program seems to be very Forensic specific, while the Keller program seems to give a very solid foundation in fundamental accounting.  I’m afraid the depth of the Florida Atlantic program would be at the sacrifice of some breadth of core accouting. Anybody from Santa Rosa, CA or north looking for a midlife accounting rookie with too much education ? Thanks for any help or insight you can provide. Ziphius

Response:

Question:

I am a qualified accountant (38) and have been consulting on Comshare FDC for a few years. Comshare FDC is a group consolidation package like Hyperion Enterprise. However, Comshare FDC does not have a large market share and I think it is being run down by Comshare who are focusing on a new product MPC. Comshare FDC jobs have always been thin on the ground and I can only see this getting worse. I am therefore considering trying to switch to SAP/Oracle as there is far more work and I have always prefered working in operational rather than head office enviroments. I think the main problem with this switch will be that I have limited ERP experience and everyone wants experience, especially in the current slow market. Does anyone have experience of making a switch like this and have any advice they could give me. I have been thinking if getting a SAP/Oracle certification is this likely to make me more employable or will my lack of experience still stop me getting work? Regards David

Response:

You really can’t GET SAP Certified with qualifying SAP experience working for a authorized SAP "Partner". At least that’s my belief Don’t know Abt Oracle.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am a qualified accountant (38) and have been consulting on Comshare FDC for a few years. Comshare FDC is a group consolidation package like Hyperion Enterprise. However, Comshare FDC does not have a large market share and I think it is being run down by Comshare who are focusing on a new product MPC. Comshare FDC jobs have always been thin on the ground and I can only see this getting worse. I am therefore considering trying to switch to SAP/Oracle as there is far more work and I have always prefered working in operational rather than head office enviroments. I think the main problem with this switch will be that I have limited ERP experience and everyone wants experience, especially in the current slow market. Does anyone have experience of making a switch like this and have any advice they could give me. I have been thinking if getting a SAP/Oracle certification is this likely to make me more employable or will my lack of experience still stop me getting work? Regards David

Response:

I have been thinking if getting a SAP/Oracle certification is this likely to make me more employable or will my lack of experience still stop me getting work? Regards David

I’m certified in FI/CO and currently working on SAP. I’ve obtained my certifications through KPMG which is an SAP partner and the certification document lists KPMG as such. I got my certification in 1999, but this didn’t guarantee SAP-related jobs per se. The only reasonable way to land an SAP job is through an internal project at your employer and there are substantially fewer SAP implementations now than in 1999. SAP has remained strong despite the downturn and it’s really difficult to learn on your own. I’m also familiar with Hyperion Enterprise and Essbase, and SAP is far more complex and idiosyncratic in its way of configuration. You need to be able to focus on relevant parts of the system to achieve your goals which is made difficult by multiple layers of security and the transport system that logs every configuration step you make. There are also relatively few legal consolidation implementations (roughly an equivalent of consolidation function found in Hyperion Enterprise) in the US, and you will have to appreciate other areas of business outside of accounting to really be able to do the accounting per se. You will come to like materials, sales documents, goods movements, and many others. If I were to compare SAP to anything else it would be the US Income Tax code. It may look easy and simple on the surface, but if you get deeper you will always get amazed at the level of complexity underlying each simple concept. Say, invoice for example is called a "billing document" in sappese and there are a lot more.

Response:

Question:

SAG TIMEBOMB TICKING HOLLYWOOD (Variety) – An emergency meeting has been set for Sept. 5 at which the full board of the Screen Actors Guild ( news – web sites) is expected to deliver the ultimatum that the industry has long feared: union members will face discipline — even expulsion — if they sign with a talent agency that refuses to operate under SAG’s now-expired "master franchise agreement," which has governed actor-agent relations in Hollywood since 1939. Trying to punish you for their failures in life. The Starmaker Why does SAG feel they have to kick actors ass everytime they are unable to get what they want from everyone else? Aren’t you’re tired of that?? Isn’t it time to get rid of your union??? Before the union gets rid of you! http://www.nrtw.org/d/decert.htm

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – SAG TIMEBOMB TICKING HOLLYWOOD (Variety) – An emergency meeting has been set for Sept. 5 at which the full board of the Screen Actors Guild ( news – web sites) is expected to deliver the ultimatum that the industry has long feared: union members will face discipline — even expulsion — if they sign with a talent agency that refuses to operate under SAG’s now-expired "master franchise agreement," which has governed actor-agent relations in Hollywood since 1939. Trying to punish you for their failures in life. The Starmaker Why does SAG feel they have to kick actors ass everytime they are unable to get what they want from everyone else? Aren’t you’re tired of that?? Isn’t it time to get rid of your union??? Before the union gets rid of you! http://www.nrtw.org/d/decert.htm

Plus, if SAG succeeds on their own, actors *still* get punished! It’s no wonder that SAG stands for The Screw Actors Guild (SAG)!

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – SAG TIMEBOMB TICKING HOLLYWOOD (Variety) – An emergency meeting has been set for Sept. 5 at which the full board of the Screen Actors Guild ( news – web sites) is expected to deliver the ultimatum that the industry has long feared: union members will face discipline — even expulsion — if they sign with a talent agency that refuses to operate under SAG’s now-expired "master franchise agreement," which has governed actor-agent relations in Hollywood since 1939. Trying to punish you for their failures in life. The Starmaker Why does SAG feel they have to kick actors ass everytime they are unable to get what they want from everyone else? Aren’t you’re tired of that?? Isn’t it time to get rid of your union??? Before the union gets rid of you! http://www.nrtw.org/d/decert.htm Plus, if SAG succeeds on their own, actors *still* get punished! It’s no wonder that SAG stands for The Screw Actors Guild (SAG)!

Actors Union Steps Up Pressure on Agents Thu Aug 22, 4:23 AM ET By Dave McNary HOLLYWOOD (Variety) – The Screen Actors Guild (SAG) has lit the fuse. It’s a short one. An emergency meeting has been set for Sept. 5 at which the full SAG board is expected to deliver the ultimatum that the industry has long feared: Union members will face discipline — even expulsion — if they sign with a talent agency that refuses to operate under SAG’s now-expired "master franchise agreement," which has governed actor-agent relations in Hollywood since 1939. In other words, actors may have to choose between their guild and their agent — for many, a nightmare scenario. And the town’s top agents are livid. "Everyone will freak out over this," said one agency chief. "They want the agents to sign, but sign what? There’s no deal on the table," said another. "It’s Vietnam," said one high-ranking labor executive. "SAG won’t bend. Neither will the agencies." The hostilities arise from an April vote when the union’s 98,000 members shot down a proposal to relax the master franchise agreement, which would have allowed the agents to forge ownership ties with production companies and advertising agencies. Actors feared they would end up working for the agents instead of the other way around. With the agreement’s expiration, agents are now free to negotiate new terms with their clients. Some have signed actors to General Service Agreements allowing agents to commission all actor revenues and extending the term of contracts longer than the typical one year. Enforcement of any SAG discipline won’t start until Jan. 1. Between now and then both sides will surely launch a fusillade of arguments buttressing their side. Though industry insiders have been hopeful for a compromise, the growing muscle of hard-liners within SAG has thwarted their efforts. Their hand was strengthened in mid April when SAG members voted down a revamp of SAG’s master franchise agreement. SAG president Melissa Gilbert and SAG CEO Bob Pisano favored the revamp but hard-liners won the day. Meanwhile talent agents, who once eyed the major ad agencies as potential investors, realize that these monoliths are in no position now to launch into acquisitions. Not only are ad agency shares tumbling, but investigations also are underway into their accounting practices. In short, the talent agencies may not be able to find any likely buyers short-term even if they are ultimately allowed to.

Response:

Question:

Hi, all.  I’m not sure if this is the right place to find an answer to my question, but I think it is, so here goes…… The company I work for is deducting $100 per pay period to be deposited into my 403(b) account (this is the equivalent of a 401(k), but for non-profits) but they are sometimes not depositing the money for 3 to 6 weeks after they have held it out of my check.  My question is……is there a law that states limits on deposit delays of employee withholdings? Thanks, Michelle

Response:

Here in Massachusetts, and depending on the details of how the plan is set up, employers must make deposits to the plan monthly, by the 15th of the month following.  So in theory, yes, they can legally not deposit your withholdings for 6 weeks. Part of the problem is in all the reporting paperwork that goes along with administering these plans and in tracking all the eligibility requirements, dollars, percentages, etc., for the participants and potential participants. Some really big companies have programs in place that automatically track all this stuff and they send in deposits every pay period.  Most companies are smaller, and there’s one overworked person in a corner somewhere tearing their hair out every month in an effort to get all the deposits credited properly, the check out, and the reports updated by the deadline of the 15th of the month following. Hope this helps. Catherine Grant – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi, all.  I’m not sure if this is the right place to find an answer to my question, but I think it is, so here goes…… The company I work for is deducting $100 per pay period to be deposited into my 403(b) account (this is the equivalent of a 401(k), but for non-profits) but they are sometimes not depositing the money for 3 to 6 weeks after they have held it out of my check.  My question is……is there a law that states limits on deposit delays of employee withholdings? Thanks, Michelle

Response:

Most companies are smaller, and there’s one overworked person in a corner somewhere tearing their hair out every month in an effort to get all the deposits credited properly, the check out, and the reports updated by the deadline of the 15th of the month following.

Thanks, Catherine.  I should have told y’all I’m in Texas.  I didn’t think of different laws for different states before I sent the post.  I wonder…..is the law about the 15th of the month a Federal law or state law? We are a small to medium non-profit but our deposits are delayed because they don’t have the  money, or choose to pay vendors instead, not because the person responsible for making the deposits has to get it straightened out. Thanks again, Michelle

Response:

To the best of my knowledge, the requirements for the 15th of the month following are ERISA requirements — in other words, part of the Federal 401k/403b gaggle of rules and regulations regarding retirement plans.  Many states add their own nuances to the lists….. Catherine – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Most companies are smaller, and there’s one overworked person in a corner somewhere tearing their hair out every month in an effort to get all the deposits credited properly, the check out, and the reports updated by the deadline of the 15th of the month following. Thanks, Catherine.  I should have told y’all I’m in Texas.  I didn’t think of different laws for different states before I sent the post.  I wonder…..is the law about the 15th of the month a Federal law or state law? We are a small to medium non-profit but our deposits are delayed because they don’t have the  money, or choose to pay vendors instead, not because the person responsible for making the deposits has to get it straightened out. Thanks again, Michelle

Response:

Thanks, Catherine.  I should have told y’all I’m in Texas. I didn’t think of different laws for different states before I sent the post.  I wonder…..is the law about the 15th of the month a Federal law or state law?

Federal. We are a small to medium non-profit but our deposits are delayed because they don’t have the  money, or choose to pay vendors instead, not because the person responsible for making the deposits has to get it straightened out.

Well, unless you actually work with the numbers you most likely don’t know what the issues are.  That being said, there isn’t any "pot of money" with your name on it that they are dipping into to pay other vendors.  The General Funds of the organization are just that, and can be, and most likely will be, used for any number of things throughout the month. As long as the withheld (and any matching) amounts are paid by the due dates, then you have nothing to worry about and certainly nothing to complain about. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens,  Georgia http://www.pat-cpa.com

Response:

Well, unless you actually work with the numbers you most likely don’t know what the issues are. That being said, there isn’t any "pot of money" with your name on it that they are dipping into to pay other vendors.  The General Funds of the organization are just that, and can be, and most likely will be, used for any number of things throughout the month.

Actually, I do know that the funds are not being transfered because they are not available, and that they are not available because they were spent paying vendors (I’m not a vendor).  I know these things because I talked to the person responsible for making the deposits. Actually, the money withheld from my paycheck is my money and they would have to pony it up if I weren’t contributing it to a retirement account. Isn’t there some rule/law about setting aside undistributed monies, deducted from employee paychecks, until which time they are distributed?  I mean, what if the company spent all the 403(b) money and then for whatever reason is not able to replace it (revenue ceases, etc.)?  Wouldn’t there be legal ramifications? As long as the withheld (and any matching) amounts are paid by the due dates, then you have nothing to worry about and certainly nothing to complain about.

The due dates is what I was asking about.  Since Catherine indicated things might be different from state to state, I asked if the laws regulating this are Federal.  Nobody in our payroll or accounting department seems to know what the laws are so they also don’t know if they are following them.  Of course, if they are within the law, then I wouldn’t complain, but that doesn’t mean I have nothing to worry about.  I’m not earning interest on "my" money while the company is using it to pay their bills. Michelle

Response:

Hi again Michelle; First to clear up a misunderstanding — sorry if I was not clear.  The due date is Federal and no state can change it.  The nuances that states add are their _own_ requirements, on top of the Federal ones, for more information that needs to be tracked and kept as reports. That said, as long as the funds are being sent in by the due date, the company is well within it’s rights to use "your" withholdings for payments to vendors, as long as when they send out the check by the 15thof the following month, they include some of "their" money to replace what they used of "yours".  (All the quotes are because this is still in the general funds and impoosible to differentiate — "your" withholdings are not tagged or highlighted in any way.) There is no requirement to pay you any interest in the time between the withholdings and the date the check is sent.  Then why should you bother? Because you are still getting to invest this money of yours on a tax-deferred basis.  So you are getting to invest more money more painlessley than any other way you can invest (unless they were gifting you with retirement funds — extremely rare these days!). Now, if the company does not send in the withholdings because they have no cash, they’re going under, whatever, yes there are legal ramifications.  If this is a real concern of yours, watch your quarterly statements from the investment management company that holds your 403(b) like a hawk.  Make sure you know exactly how much money was supposed to go in and that it got there.  If something doesn’t seem right, call them first to make sure a last deposit didn’t make a statement because it was posted a day too late or something like that. If the payment never got there, ask the person in charge what happened.  If you don’t like that answer (for example, "We didn’t have the funds" as opposed to "Ooops!  Oh my God, thanks for telling me!!!") then you can talk legal. One other thing if you’re really concerned about all this — if/when you leave this employer, look into the possibility of rolling over this 403(b) into your own rollover IRA so the money is more in your control.  This shouldn’t be a big thing, though — once the investment company has the funds, they are yours and in your name and your employer can’t touch them. Catherine – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well, unless you actually work with the numbers you most likely don’t know what the issues are. That being said, there isn’t any "pot of money" with your name on it that they are dipping into to pay other vendors.  The General Funds of the organization are just that, and can be, and most likely will be, used for any number of things throughout the month. Actually, I do know that the funds are not being transfered because they are not available, and that they are not available because they were spent paying vendors (I’m not a vendor).  I know these things because I talked to the person responsible for making the deposits. Actually, the money withheld from my paycheck is my money and they would have to pony it up if I weren’t contributing it to a retirement account. Isn’t there some rule/law about setting aside undistributed monies, deducted from employee paychecks, until which time they are distributed?  I mean, what if the company spent all the 403(b) money and then for whatever reason is not able to replace it (revenue ceases, etc.)?  Wouldn’t there be legal ramifications? As long as the withheld (and any matching) amounts are paid by the due dates, then you have nothing to worry about and certainly nothing to complain about. The due dates is what I was asking about.  Since Catherine indicated things might be different from state to state, I asked if the laws regulating this are Federal.  Nobody in our payroll or accounting department seems to know what the laws are so they also don’t know if they are following them.  Of course, if they are within the law, then I wouldn’t complain, but that doesn’t mean I have nothing to worry about.  I’m not earning interest on "my" money while the company is using it to pay their bills. Michelle

Response:

Thanks so much for the thorough explanation  I am definitely watching the quarterlies, which is how I found that things didn’t seem quite right. The organization isn’t going under, it’s just a non-profit with cash-flow problems sometimes.  We are in the process of being taken over by a more business oriented lot so maybe some of this will improve. Thanks again. Michelle

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi again Michelle; First to clear up a misunderstanding — sorry if I was not clear.  The due date is Federal and no state can change it.  The nuances that states add are their _own_ requirements, on top of the Federal ones, for more information that needs to be tracked and kept as reports. That said, as long as the funds are being sent in by the due date, the company is well within it’s rights to use "your" withholdings for payments to vendors, as long as when they send out the check by the 15thof the following month, they include some of "their" money to replace what they used of "yours".  (All the quotes are because this is still in the general funds and impoosible to differentiate — "your" withholdings are not tagged or highlighted in any way.) There is no requirement to pay you any interest in the time between the withholdings and the date the check is sent.  Then why should you bother? Because you are still getting to invest this money of yours on a tax-deferred basis.  So you are getting to invest more money more painlessley than any other way you can invest (unless they were gifting you with retirement funds — extremely rare these days!). Now, if the company does not send in the withholdings because they have no cash, they’re going under, whatever, yes there are legal ramifications.  If this is a real concern of yours, watch your quarterly statements from the investment management company that holds your 403(b) like a hawk.  Make sure you know exactly how much money was supposed to go in and that it got there.  If something doesn’t seem right, call them first to make sure a last deposit didn’t make a statement because it was posted a day too late or something like that. If the payment never got there, ask the person in charge what happened. If you don’t like that answer (for example, "We didn’t have the funds" as opposed to "Ooops!  Oh my God, thanks for telling me!!!") then you can talk legal. One other thing if you’re really concerned about all this — if/when you leave this employer, look into the possibility of rolling over this 403(b) into your own rollover IRA so the money is more in your control.  This shouldn’t be a big thing, though — once the investment company has the funds, they are yours and in your name and your employer can’t touch them. Catherine Well, unless you actually work with the numbers you most likely don’t know what the issues are. That being said, there isn’t any "pot of money" with your name on it that they are dipping into to pay other vendors.  The General Funds of the organization are just that, and can be, and most likely will be, used for any number of things throughout the month. Actually, I do know that the funds are not being transfered because they are not available, and that they are not available because they were spent paying vendors (I’m not a vendor).  I know these things because I talked to the person responsible for making the deposits. Actually, the money withheld from my paycheck is my money and they would have to pony it up if I weren’t contributing it to a retirement account. Isn’t there some rule/law about setting aside undistributed monies, deducted from employee paychecks, until which time they are distributed?  I mean, what if the company spent all the 403(b) money and then for whatever reason is not able to replace it (revenue ceases, etc.)?  Wouldn’t there be legal ramifications? As long as the withheld (and any matching) amounts are paid by the due dates, then you have nothing to worry about and certainly nothing to complain about. The due dates is what I was asking about.  Since Catherine indicated things might be different from state to state, I asked if the laws regulating this are Federal.  Nobody in our payroll or accounting department seems to know what the laws are so they also don’t know if they are following them. Of course, if they are within the law, then I wouldn’t complain, but that doesn’t mean I have nothing to worry about.  I’m not earning interest on "my" money while the company is using it to pay their bills. Michelle

Response:

"Michelle Fulton" wrote Actually, the money withheld from my paycheck is my money

True. and they would have to pony it up if I weren’t contributing it to a retirement account.

Then don’t participate. Isn’t there some rule/law about setting aside undistributed monies, deducted from employee paychecks, until which time they are distributed?

Nope. I mean, what if the company spent all the 403(b) money and then for whatever reason is not able to replace it (revenue ceases, etc.)? Wouldn’t there be legal ramifications?

There certainly would.  But that doesn’t mean they have to "set it aside" or otherwise account for it during the time it gets withheld and the time it gets deposited. I’m not earning interest on "my" money while the company is using it to pay their bills.

The stop participating in the 401K.  It’s that simple.  You have your money to invest as you see fit. Have you ever thought that they "use your money" from paycheck to paycheck? Just a thought. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens,  Georgia http://www.pat-cpa.com

Response:

Question:

worthless head.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you have proof, show us, or shut the fuck up. I’m really sick and tired of reading unsubstanciated accusations inorder to stop opinions you don’t like. -P How do I have the power to stop opinions I don’t like on USENET? I am telling the people of Camp Gaea that Talesin is giving them a very bad name. That may be your intention, but you are coming very near libel. Basless accusations seem to spew forth from the left whenever they encounter an opinion that they don’t like and are unable to combat in an intellectual manner. I’m totally sick of it. To Talesin – Dude, come on, learn a little tact. You are bringing alot of this on your head. Rise above the left wing of our religious grouping and shine like a beacon of truth that you can be. -P If by the time you are 20 you are not a liberal, you have no heart. If by the time you are 30 you are not a conservative, you have no brain.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – That may be your intention, but you are coming very near libel. Oh please let Talesin take me to court. I’ve got enough evidence to put him in jail. Basless accusations seem to spew forth from the left whenever they encounter an opinion that they don’t like and are unable to combat in an intellectual manner. I’m totally sick of it. These are not baseless accusations. I have documented proof that Talesin has portrayed Raven BlackBane. There is also documented proof in the hands of administrators at the COTSE security service. If Talesin gets out of line I will present it. To Talesin – Dude, come on, learn a little tact. You are bringing alot of this on your head. Rise above the left wing of our religious grouping and shine like a beacon of truth that you can be. I’m not left or right wing. I’m actually a moderate. Talesin is a raceist. The proof is in his posts right here. Read his crap.

Point me to the posts that you claim portray racist views. Personally, I see mountians made out of mole hills. Talesin is rude and tactless, in my opinion, but he has a great many points that he makes. I don’t recall him making a racist comment, but then I have not read every single one of his posts. I skim alot until I find something that intrests me, like I guess most people do. Let this guy take me to court for libel. I’ve got everything I need to make a strong case including evidence of online criminal activity. This evidence is already being looked at and involves credit card fraud.

All I’m saying is prove it or shut up about it. If he has commited criminal activity, then let the courts deal with it and shut up. -P If by the time you are 20 you are not a liberal, you have no heart. If by the time you are 30 you are not a conservative, you have no brain.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you have proof, show us, or shut the fuck up. I’m really sick and tired of reading unsubstanciated accusations inorder to stop opinions you don’t like. -P How do I have the power to stop opinions I don’t like on USENET? I am telling the people of Camp Gaea that Talesin is giving them a very bad name. That may be your intention, but you are coming very near libel. Basless accusations seem to spew forth from the left whenever they encounter an opinion that they don’t like and are unable to combat in an intellectual manner. I’m totally sick of it. To Talesin – Dude, come on, learn a little tact. You are bringing alot of this on your head. Rise above the left wing of our religious grouping and shine like a beacon of truth that you can be.

Talesin shone like a beacon of truth? I don’t remember fotty doing that. Do you have evidence? P -P If by the time you are 20 you are not a liberal, you have no heart. If by the time you are 30 you are not a conservative, you

have no brain.

Response:

"Talesin- God of Free Pagan UseNet"

By talking shit about the Church of the Iron Oak

without having all the facts, Talesin has not only shamed himself but has dared to implicate that his views are those views of Camp Gaea. Furthermore his raceist comments on USENET makes other Pagans wonder just what kind of organization  Earth Rising, Inc. is. He has openly and verbally declaired war on Wicca and all Wiccans and tries to follow through by trolling alt.religion.wicca. There is now proof that he is the main person behind the Raven

BlackBane nickname and  that he is online friends with Tim Anderson and Rob Harrell who also post under this nickname. Talesin has also been posting under the nickname of "Frog" and has been engaging in overtly criminal activities and stalking. If I was Clarity who runs Earth Rising, I would

clairify that Talesin does not represent me, my group, Camp Gaea, or my teachings. If you have proof, show us, or shut the fuck up. I’m really sick and tired of reading unsubstanciated accusations inorder to stop opinions you don’t like. Welcome to the psychotic, deluded world of ren

… but be aware that fOtty’s world is *far more* psychotic and deluded! P – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

That may be your intention, but you are coming very near libel.

Oh please let Talesin take me to court. I’ve got enough evidence to put him in jail. Basless accusations seem to spew forth from the left whenever they encounter an opinion that they don’t like and are unable to combat in an intellectual manner. I’m totally sick of it.

These are not baseless accusations. I have documented proof that Talesin has portrayed Raven BlackBane. There is also documented proof in the hands of administrators at the COTSE security service. If Talesin gets out of line I will present it. To Talesin – Dude, come on, learn a little tact. You are bringing alot of this on your head. Rise above the left wing of our religious grouping and shine like a beacon of truth that you can be.

I’m not left or right wing. I’m actually a moderate. Talesin is a raceist. The proof is in his posts right here. Read his crap. Let this guy take me to court for libel. I’ve got everything I need to make a strong case including evidence of online criminal activity. This evidence is already being looked at and involves credit card fraud.

Response:

Dear Friends, Over the past 10 years, Gaea and Earth Rising have encountered many difficulties. Most of these arose out of financial need, some from a shortage of volunteer help and more than a few evolved from personality issues. Through these trials, we have grown stronger, defined and redefined ourselves, and developed a cohesive community comprised of like-minded people from diverse segments of society. Now we find ourselves facing the greatest challenge we have ever known. We are involved in a struggle to maintain the very existence of our beloved land and, for the first time, the challenge is coming from outside our community. If you are not aware of our current situation (or if you are not up to date), please take a moment to read the enclosed two-page summary of the events that brought us to our current position. Those of us who attended one or more of the three hearings mentioned in the summary were appalled at the allegations that have been leveled at us. We have heard reports of people in robes and pointed hats carrying torches through the woods. We have heard assumptions that since there are gay men using the land, there is probably pedophilia going on. We have heard assertions that people can’t be naked together without having sex. And the list goes on. I can only speak for myself, but I have been amazed and outraged. Unimaginable things have been said by people who did not even know Gaea existed until news articles about the hearings were printed. I am dumbfounded by the fact that a few neighbors, armed with nothing but a handful of allegations, have spearheaded such a crippling movement. But more than anything else, I am absolutely, unequivocally unwilling to lie down and let it end. For many years, Gaea has been a sanctuary to me and to thousands of others I have come to consider family. She has been a second home. I have loved, I have laughed and I have played, but I have also come to find a profound sense of the sacred nature of all things. I have buried my familiar, mourned the loss of fallen brothers, and found answers to questions long forgotten. Gaea is home, church, school and more, and no one is going to take it away without a fight. While we have taken a pro-active stance, the County seems to have adopted a strategy of slowing things down so that we have to exert great effort to pull them along. It is a costly process in time and money. Meanwhile, we await a decision that will determine whether the Heartland Festival will be held at Gaea or at an alternative site this year. What is happening here is bigger than us. It is bigger than Earth Rising. It is bigger than Leavenworth County. What is happening at Gaea is about the right of people to be who they are as long as their actions are not harming anyone. What is happening is in fact about civil rights. It is about standing up not only for your rights, but for those of the people around you as well. This is a time for all of the communities that make up Gaea’s family to stand together with love and acceptance and state clearly, distinctly, calmly and with absolute certainty that we will fight for the rights of all of us to be allowed the simple yet unalienable right to be who we are without explanation, without compromise and without apology. I am sure that many of you would agree with me when I say that I cannot imagine what life would be like without Gaea. To see this through we need help, everyone’s help in one way or another. We are proposing two ways you can support our efforts to ensure the future of Gaea. First, this year’s fundraising appeal is being targeted toward the Gaea Legal Defense Fund. You may use the enclosed card and envelope to send your financial gift. Whatever its size, your gift, when given in accordance with your ability, will be received and treated with great respect and appreciation. Secondly, remember that we are all magical beings. This is a time to put into practice those things that we know to be true. Whether your work is in spells, prayer, meditation, speech or thought, work now to heal the problems that surround us. Most of us believe that what we put out comes back to us. We don’t need hate or reprisal now. There has been enough of that. Let the attorneys battle a solution out in court while we maintain a positive image of how beautiful things can be. This letter is longer than usual, but circumstances are extreme. Our beliefs, our land and our way of life are at stake. Please join us in this struggle. On behalf of the Board and staff of Earth Rising and Gaea, I offer my deepest gratitude. Sincerely, John Pearse (Clarity) President, Earth Rising, Inc. Earth Rising, Inc. Post Office Box 10442 Kansas City, MO 64171-0442 (816) 931-4443 (913) 796-2141  www.campgaea.org

Response:

If you have proof, show us, or shut the fuck up. I’m really sick and tired of reading unsubstanciated accusations inorder to stop opinions you don’t like. -P

How do I have the power to stop opinions I don’t like on USENET? I am telling the people of Camp Gaea that Talesin is giving them a very bad name.

Response:

If you have proof, show us, or shut the fuck up. I’m really sick and tired of reading unsubstanciated accusations inorder to stop opinions you don’t like. -P How do I have the power to stop opinions I don’t like on USENET? I am telling the people of Camp Gaea that Talesin is giving them a very bad name.

That may be your intention, but you are coming very near libel. Basless accusations seem to spew forth from the left whenever they encounter an opinion that they don’t like and are unable to combat in an intellectual manner. I’m totally sick of it. To Talesin – Dude, come on, learn a little tact. You are bringing alot of this on your head. Rise above the left wing of our religious grouping and shine like a beacon of truth that you can be. -P If by the time you are 20 you are not a liberal, you have no heart. If by the time you are 30 you are not a conservative, you have no brain.

Response:

Oh, and isn’t that where you claim to vacation? How "convenient"…… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Iron Oak was in Florida, idiot Translation: "Iron Oak laughed me out of the place when I came there demanding all their knowledge, so I’m gonna help the fundies get them shut down, just like I helped the fundies steal the election for my mentor, George Bush…." Iron Oak was conducting meetings in a private, residential area. They created a hazard by generating traffic, blocked the streets with their cars, disturbed the neighbors with their noise, and violated the burning ordinances.Unlike Gaea which has been operating as a retreat center since the 1920’s, Iron Oak violated a law that was established and was being enforced. The people of Gaea are being persecuted solely based on who they are and what they believe, Iron Oak was just brought to task under the law. A just law that was doing what it was intended to do, not a perverted twisting of the law into a tool of prejudice and hate. Just because they were Wiccans does not put them above the law. Iron Oak was meeting in a private residence much like people do who conduct Bible studies, yet nobody in Palm Bay was harrassing Christians, now were they? In fact many local Christians supported Iron Oak’s legal efforts because they perceived that this could set a precedent which would make it easier to persecute Christians who chose to meet in their homes. What Iron Oak did with the legal defense money is another matter, but I believe they were correct in fighting what I believe is an unjust law. — Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

There are several differences the major one being that Gaea has been operating as a camp in this rural area since the 1920’s. Moreover, the charges brought against them are false and brought forth solely on the basis of intolerance. Iron Oak was a group of people who suddenly decided to meet as a church in a residential area. They did cause noise, traffic congestion, and general disruption to the neighborhood.

…which is of course why the city dropped the complaint when Iron Oak fought back.  Your source for this data is what? I might also point out that Iron Oak dissolved and that one of the founders took that "defense fund" and vanished with it.

This turns out to be a lie, easily disproven. www.ironoak.org The page was last updated in January of this year.  The page lists events as far in advance as July. Gaea is run by a corporation (Earth Rising) comprised of representatives from a cross section of Pagan organizations here in our community. Since this is the case, it is not likely for any malfeasance to occur.

Because corporations never commit malfeasance?  You’ve -got- to be kidding. Finally, I know these people. They are my family.

That alone is reason to consider them suspect.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – By talking shit about the Church of the Iron Oak without having all the facts, Talesin has not only shamed himself but has dared to implicate that his views are those views of Camp Gaea. Furthermore his raceist comments on USENET makes other Pagans wonder just what kind of organization  Earth Rising, Inc. is. He has openly and verbally declaired war on Wicca and all Wiccans and tries to follow through by trolling alt.religion.wicca. There is now proof that he is the main person behind the Raven BlackBane nickname and  that he is online friends with Tim Anderson and Rob Harrell who also post under this nickname. Talesin has also been posting under the nickname of "Frog" and has been engaging in overtly criminal activities and stalking. If I was Clarity who runs Earth Rising, I would clairify that Talesin does not represent me, my group, Camp Gaea, or my teachings. If you have proof, show us, or shut the fuck up. I’m really sick and tired of reading unsubstanciated accusations inorder to stop opinions you don’t like.

Welcome to the psychotic, deluded world of ren — Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

Iron Oak was in Florida, idiot – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Translation: "Iron Oak laughed me out of the place when I came there demanding all their knowledge, so I’m gonna help the fundies get them shut down, just like I helped the fundies steal the election for my mentor, George Bush…." Iron Oak was conducting meetings in a private, residential area. They created a hazard by generating traffic, blocked the streets with their cars, disturbed the neighbors with their noise, and violated the burning ordinances.Unlike Gaea which has been operating as a retreat center since the 1920’s, Iron Oak violated a law that was established and was being enforced. The people of Gaea are being persecuted solely based on who they are and what they believe, Iron Oak was just brought to task under the law. A just law that was doing what it was intended to do, not a perverted twisting of the law into a tool of prejudice and hate. Just because they were Wiccans does not put them above the law. Iron Oak was meeting in a private residence much like people do who conduct Bible studies, yet nobody in Palm Bay was harrassing Christians, now were they? In fact many local Christians supported Iron Oak’s legal efforts because they perceived that this could set a precedent which would make it easier to persecute Christians who chose to meet in their homes. What Iron Oak did with the legal defense money is another matter, but I believe they were correct in fighting what I believe is an unjust law.

– Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Translation: "Iron Oak laughed me (TALESIN) out of the place when I came there demanding all their knowledge, so I’m gonna help the fundies get them shut down, just like I helped the fundies steal the election for my mentor, George Bush…."

Response:

Merry Meet, Tarotlaydee Talesin is a Fundamentalist Radical Rightwing Christian Raceist pretending to be a Pagan in order to try to destroy the pagan USENET newsgroups. His alternate identity on the newsgroups is Raven BlackBane. He has the help of two people who are in similar violence based organizations in Northern Va. I and the others on these newsgroups have mananged to contain the damage he has caused over the last three years and have even taken advantage of his silly notions by setting him apart and laughing at him by expressing our own views. For example, Talesin just engaged in stereotyping Korean Americans and didn’t even realize just how backward his comments were. We have placed a curse on Talesin and parade him around to show the world what happens to trolls who fuck with pagans. I myself am aiding others in keeping his power levels low by constantly draining him to levels of stupor that can’t be obtained with the massive amounts of beer he consumes daily. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am SURE that you do not have the correct information about Church of the Iron Oak since I sat across from Roger Coleman at dinner, (founding member and HP of the Church of the Iron Oak) just last Saturday at the Bridfest Festival in St. Petersburg, FL. Yes, I am VERY sure that this church has not dissolved and is still operational since they are also listed on Witchvox under the Florida Groups and Circles and still have an operational website that can be located with any internet search engine. A few bad apples spoil the whole bunch…you cannot judge a group of people by the actions of one or a few…Roger Coleman is the head of the Church and is very active and visible in the Pagan/Wiccan community here in Florida. Speading disinformation without checking it out first does nothing but divide us! Instead, we should be trying to find ways to unify! the Tarotlaydee )0(

Response:

By talking shit about the Church of the Iron Oak without having all the facts, Talesin has not only shamed himself but has dared to implicate that his views are those views of Camp Gaea. Furthermore his raceist comments on USENET makes other Pagans wonder just what kind of organization  Earth Rising, Inc. is. He has openly and verbally declaired war on Wicca and all Wiccans and tries to follow through by trolling alt.religion.wicca. There is now proof that he is the main person behind the Raven BlackBane nickname and   that he is online friends with Tim Anderson and Rob Harrell who also post under this nickname. Talesin has also been posting under the nickname of "Frog" and has been engaging in overtly criminal activities and stalking. If I was Clarity who runs Earth Rising, I would clairify that Talesin does not represent me, my group, Camp Gaea, or my teachings.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – By talking shit about the Church of the Iron Oak without having all the facts, Talesin has not only shamed himself but has dared to implicate that his views are those views of Camp Gaea. Furthermore his raceist comments on USENET makes other Pagans wonder just what kind of organization  Earth Rising, Inc. is. He has openly and verbally declaired war on Wicca and all Wiccans and tries to follow through by trolling alt.religion.wicca. There is now proof that he is the main person behind the Raven BlackBane nickname and  that he is online friends with Tim Anderson and Rob Harrell who also post under this nickname. Talesin has also been posting under the nickname of "Frog" and has been engaging in overtly criminal activities and stalking. If I was Clarity who runs Earth Rising, I would clairify that Talesin does not represent me, my group, Camp Gaea, or my teachings.

If you have proof, show us, or shut the fuck up. I’m really sick and tired of reading unsubstanciated accusations inorder to stop opinions you don’t like. -P If by the time you are 20 you are not a liberal, you have no heart. If by the time you are 30 you are not a conservative, you have no brain.

Response:

Translation: "Iron Oak laughed me out of the place when I came there demanding all their knowledge, so I’m gonna help the fundies get them shut down, just like I helped the fundies steal the election for my mentor, George Bush…." – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Iron Oak was conducting meetings in a private, residential area. They created a hazard by generating traffic, blocked the streets with their cars, disturbed the neighbors with their noise, and violated the burning ordinances.Unlike Gaea which has been operating as a retreat center since the 1920’s, Iron Oak violated a law that was established and was being enforced. The people of Gaea are being persecuted solely based on who they are and what they believe, Iron Oak was just brought to task under the law. A just law that was doing what it was intended to do, not a perverted twisting of the law into a tool of prejudice and hate. Just because they were Wiccans does not put them above the law. Iron Oak was meeting in a private residence much like people do who conduct Bible studies, yet nobody in Palm Bay was harrassing Christians, now were they? In fact many local Christians supported Iron Oak’s legal efforts because they perceived that this could set a precedent which would make it easier to persecute Christians who chose to meet in their homes. What Iron Oak did with the legal defense money is another matter, but I believe they were correct in fighting what I believe is an unjust law. NT Dana — ***** the Kajun Hippie http://www.angelfire.com/la3/kajunhippie "And the truth shall set you free… but first it will piss you off." –Saint Sierra, _How To Be A God:  Volume One_ I’m troubled by news of what’s happened to Gaea, and will look into the matter. I’m curious, though:  You were highly criticial, to say the least, of the Church of the Iron Oak several years ago, when they needed money to help with their legal battles.  Does this represent a change of heart? There are several differences the major one being that Gaea has been operating as a camp in this rural area since the 1920’s. Moreover, the charges brought against them are false and brought forth solely on the basis of intolerance. Iron Oak was a group of people who suddenly decided to meet as a church in a residential area. They did cause noise, traffic congestion, and general disruption to the neighborhood. I might also point out that Iron Oak dissolved and that one of the founders took that "defense fund" and vanished with it. Gaea is run by a corporation (Earth Rising) comprised of representatives from a cross section of Pagan organizations here in our community. Since this is the case, it is not likely for any malfeasance to occur. Finally, I know these people. They are my family. — Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

Iron Oak was conducting meetings in a private, residential area. They created a hazard by generating traffic, blocked the streets with their cars, disturbed the neighbors with their noise, and violated the burning ordinances.Unlike Gaea which has been operating as a retreat center since the 1920’s, Iron Oak violated a law that was established and was being enforced. The people of Gaea are being persecuted solely based on who they are and what they believe, Iron Oak was just brought to task under the law. A just law that was doing what it was intended to do, not a perverted twisting of the law into a tool of prejudice and hate. Just because they were Wiccans does not put them above the law. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Iron Oak was meeting in a private residence much like people do who conduct Bible studies, yet nobody in Palm Bay was harrassing Christians, now were they? In fact many local Christians supported Iron Oak’s legal efforts because they perceived that this could set a precedent which would make it easier to persecute Christians who chose to meet in their homes. What Iron Oak did with the legal defense money is another matter, but I believe they were correct in fighting what I believe is an unjust law. NT Dana — ***** the Kajun Hippie http://www.angelfire.com/la3/kajunhippie "And the truth shall set you free… but first it will piss you off." –Saint Sierra, _How To Be A God:  Volume One_ I’m troubled by news of what’s happened to Gaea, and will look into the matter. I’m curious, though:  You were highly criticial, to say the least, of the Church of the Iron Oak several years ago, when they needed money to help with their legal battles.  Does this represent a change of heart? There are several differences the major one being that Gaea has been operating as a camp in this rural area since the 1920’s. Moreover, the charges brought against them are false and brought forth solely on the basis of intolerance. Iron Oak was a group of people who suddenly decided to meet as a church in a residential area. They did cause noise, traffic congestion, and general disruption to the neighborhood. I might also point out that Iron Oak dissolved and that one of the founders took that "defense fund" and vanished with it. Gaea is run by a corporation (Earth Rising) comprised of representatives from a cross section of Pagan organizations here in our community. Since this is the case, it is not likely for any malfeasance to occur. Finally, I know these people. They are my family.

– Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

Iron Oak was meeting in a private residence much like people do who conduct Bible studies, yet nobody in Palm Bay was harrassing Christians, now were they? In fact many local Christians supported Iron Oak’s legal efforts because they perceived that this could set a precedent which would make it easier to persecute Christians who chose to meet in their homes. What Iron Oak did with the legal defense money is another matter, but I believe they were correct in fighting what I believe is an unjust law. NT Dana — ***** the Kajun Hippie http://www.angelfire.com/la3/kajunhippie "And the truth shall set you free… but first it will piss you off." –Saint Sierra, _How To Be A God:  Volume One_ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m troubled by news of what’s happened to Gaea, and will look into the matter. I’m curious, though:  You were highly criticial, to say the least, of the Church of the Iron Oak several years ago, when they needed money to help with their legal battles.  Does this represent a change of heart? There are several differences the major one being that Gaea has been operating as a camp in this rural area since the 1920’s. Moreover, the charges brought against them are false and brought forth solely on the basis of intolerance. Iron Oak was a group of people who suddenly decided to meet as a church in a residential area. They did cause noise, traffic congestion, and general disruption to the neighborhood. I might also point out that Iron Oak dissolved and that one of the founders took that "defense fund" and vanished with it. Gaea is run by a corporation (Earth Rising) comprised of representatives from a cross section of Pagan organizations here in our community. Since this is the case, it is not likely for any malfeasance to occur. Finally, I know these people. They are my family. — Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

If I don’t, prove me wrong. I don’t care whom you ate dinner with (the fact you did does make me wonder about your veracity) I would like to facts. Start with an accounting for all that money. The situation at Camp is quite different and should be discussed under a separate heading

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am SURE that you do not have the correct information about Church of the Iron Oak since I sat across from Roger Coleman at dinner, (founding member and HP of the Church of the Iron Oak) just last Saturday at the Bridfest Festival in St. Petersburg, FL. Yes, I am VERY sure that this church has not dissolved and is still operational since they are also listed on Witchvox under the Florida Groups and Circles and still have an operational website that can be located with any internet search engine. A few bad apples spoil the whole bunch…you cannot judge a group of people by the actions of one or a few…Roger Coleman is the head of the Church and is very active and visible in the Pagan/Wiccan community here in Florida. Speading disinformation without checking it out first does nothing but divide us! Instead, we should be trying to find ways to unify! the Tarotlaydee )0(

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m troubled by news of what’s happened to Gaea, and will look into the matter. I’m curious, though:  You were highly criticial, to say the least, of the Church of the Iron Oak several years ago, when they needed money to help with their legal battles.  Does this represent a change of heart? There are several differences the major one being that Gaea has been operating as a camp in this rural area since the 1920’s. Moreover, the charges brought against them are false and brought forth solely on the basis of intolerance. Iron Oak was a group of people who suddenly decided to meet as a church in a residential area. They did cause noise, traffic congestion, and general disruption to the neighborhood. I might also point out that Iron Oak dissolved and that one of the founders took that "defense fund" and vanished with it. Gaea is run by a corporation (Earth Rising) comprised of representatives from a cross section of Pagan organizations here in our community. Since this is the case, it is not likely for any malfeasance to occur. Finally, I know these people. They are my family.

– Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

I’m troubled by news of what’s happened to Gaea, and will look into the matter. I’m curious, though:  You were highly criticial, to say the least, of the Church of the Iron Oak several years ago, when they needed money to help with their legal battles.  Does this represent a change of heart? Dan

Response:

Of course not; fOt’s not that intelligent. It’s just a ploy to make simplewits think he’s some kind of Pagan or something……

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m troubled by news of what’s happened to Gaea, and will look into the matter. I’m curious, though:  You were highly criticial, to say the least, of the Church of the Iron Oak several years ago, when they needed money to help with their legal battles.  Does this represent a change of heart? Dan

Response:

I’m troubled by news of what’s happened to Gaea, and will look into the matter. I’m curious, though:  You were highly criticial, to say the least, of the Church of the Iron Oak several years ago, when they needed money to help with their legal battles.  Does this represent a change of heart?

There are several differences the major one being that Gaea has been operating as a camp in this rural area since the 1920’s. Moreover, the charges brought against them are false and brought forth solely on the basis of intolerance. Iron Oak was a group of people who suddenly decided to meet as a church in a residential area. They did cause noise, traffic congestion, and general disruption to the neighborhood. I might also point out that Iron Oak dissolved and that one of the founders took that "defense fund" and vanished with it. Gaea is run by a corporation (Earth Rising) comprised of representatives from a cross section of Pagan organizations here in our community. Since this is the case, it is not likely for any malfeasance to occur. Finally, I know these people. They are my family. — Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

I am SURE that you do not have the correct information about Church of the Iron Oak since I sat across from Roger Coleman at dinner, (founding member and HP of the Church of the Iron Oak) just last Saturday at the Bridfest Festival in St. Petersburg, FL. Yes, I am VERY sure that this church has not dissolved and is still operational since they are also listed on Witchvox under the Florida Groups and Circles and still have an operational website that can be located with any internet search engine. A few bad apples spoil the whole bunch…you cannot judge a group of people by the actions of one or a few…Roger Coleman is the head of the Church and is very active and visible in the Pagan/Wiccan community here in Florida. Speading disinformation without checking it out first does nothing but divide us! Instead, we should be trying to find ways to unify! the Tarotlaydee )0( – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m troubled by news of what’s happened to Gaea, and will look into the matter. I’m curious, though:  You were highly criticial, to say the least, of the Church of the Iron Oak several years ago, when they needed money to help with their legal battles.  Does this represent a change of heart? There are several differences the major one being that Gaea has been operating as a camp in this rural area since the 1920’s. Moreover, the charges brought against them are false and brought forth solely on the basis of intolerance. Iron Oak was a group of people who suddenly decided to meet as a church in a residential area. They did cause noise, traffic congestion, and general disruption to the neighborhood. I might also point out that Iron Oak dissolved and that one of the founders took that "defense fund" and vanished with it. Gaea is run by a corporation (Earth Rising) comprised of representatives from a cross section of Pagan organizations here in our community. Since this is the case, it is not likely for any malfeasance to occur. Finally, I know these people. They are my family.

Response:

Nice grammar, multi  - masterbater – degree carrying fraud……. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If I don’t, prove me wrong. I don’t care whom you ate dinner with (the fact you did does make me wonder about your veracity) I would like to facts. Start with an accounting for all that money. The situation at Camp is quite different and should be discussed under a separate heading I am SURE that you do not have the correct information about Church of the Iron Oak since I sat across from Roger Coleman at dinner, (founding member and HP of the Church of the Iron Oak) just last Saturday at the Bridfest Festival in St. Petersburg, FL. Yes, I am VERY sure that this church has not dissolved and is still operational since they are also listed on Witchvox under the Florida Groups and Circles and still have an operational website that can be located with any internet search engine. A few bad apples spoil the whole bunch…you cannot judge a group of people by the actions of one or a few…Roger Coleman is the head of the Church and is very active and visible in the Pagan/Wiccan community here in Florida. Speading disinformation without checking it out first does nothing but divide us! Instead, we should be trying to find ways to unify! the Tarotlaydee )0( I’m troubled by news of what’s happened to Gaea, and will look into the matter. I’m curious, though:  You were highly criticial, to say the least, of the Church of the Iron Oak several years ago, when they needed money to help with their legal battles.  Does this represent a change of heart? There are several differences the major one being that Gaea has been operating as a camp in this rural area since the 1920’s. Moreover, the charges brought against them are false and brought forth solely on the basis of intolerance. Iron Oak was a group of people who suddenly decided to meet as a church in a residential area. They did cause noise, traffic congestion, and general disruption to the neighborhood. I might also point out that Iron Oak dissolved and that one of the founders took that "defense fund" and vanished with it. Gaea is run by a corporation (Earth Rising) comprised of representatives from a cross section of Pagan organizations here in our community. Since this is the case, it is not likely for any malfeasance to occur. Finally, I know these people. They are my family. — Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft "If we are here to help others, exactly what are others here for?"                                                  - George Carlin

Response:

Question:

I did invite you to be a Usual Suspect, didn’t I?  If not, please accept my apology, and a sincere invitation to join us at http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=1356767&a=10355976 If you’d like to join, simply send me a jpg and you’ll be up immediately. Lisa

Response:

Two months and I’m still not completely used to new newsreader software.  The feature I miss the most about the old software are the *SEPARATE*  buttons for "reply" and "reply to sender". Apologies again, sigh… Lisa

Response:

BIG SNIP Gene said: << I strongly feel that the more skilled and knowledgeable a photographer becomes, the less inclined he is to use automation.   The source of pride in his work is the skills and knowledge that enable him to produce photographs without computer assistance.  Nobody rides a bicycle with training wheels, if he is able to ride without them. My pride comes from making good photographs, not in how much or how little of my skill I used to get that photograph. I can equally use chrome film, a flash meter, monolites w/ umbrellas, grid spots, manual focus, manual exposure, etc. to get the results I want in a studio set up, or, I am just as happy using program (with shift) or aperture priority at a fast moving event w/ TTL (or some auto variant of that) flash and either color neg or chrome film. Its all the same to me. What counts, for me,  is the shot, period. I don’t use automation because I have to, I use automation when I *want to.* Nobody rides a bicycle at all if a car w/ auto transmission will get them their faster, but whether you walk, drive an auto or manual car, take the ferry, or ride in a jet (and let the pilot steer) they’re all just a means to a destination. My enjoyment comes from making good shots, not twisting knobs to prove how accomplished I am, I know where my skill level is, and I choose many ways to get to my destination (the finished shot) depending on my preference/circumstances. Sometimes the hard way/long way isn’t the only way, every level of automation/non-automation has its place. Using TTL flash doesn’t make you a better or a worse photographer so long as you get the results you are after. Reliance (or the lack thereof) on automation is neither a virtue nor a vice, just another photographic choice. SNIP << I believe a person learns more about the fundamentals of photography, and learns them faster, by using non-computerized equipment.  Indeed, the more one relies on automation the less he sees the need to learn the fundamentals.  The computerized camera user may never see the err of his ways until perhaps 20 years have passed, and he realizes that he has never taken a "creative" picture – and that he has spent all of that time and money outputting the mundane snapshots which an anonymous Japanese software engineer programmed into his equipment. Or he can become master of his computerized camera and be thankful that such conveniences exist to aid him in his picture taking and carry out his picture making choices. << Perhaps it is only after the photographer has filled up his garage with shoeboxes full of mundane snapshots, which have been looked at only once and are worthy or nothing more, that he realizes that computerized camera gear was a siren’s song which wasted his time and money and produced nothing of value – for himself or anyone else.  At least, that is what happened to me.  It was only after I overcame my love of equipment automation that I was able to go beyond the brick wall that was keeping me from producing professional quality work.  It was only by developing a love for learning and applying technique, rather than relying on electronic gadgetry, that I was able to become a successful professional  - esteemed within my own community for the ability to produce predictably fine work. What happened to you sounds more like a change of mindset than "gearset" – you could have probably just as easily over-ridden your computerized cameras and gotten the same results. It was your love for learning and applying technique that did it, it had nothing to do with the gadgetry itself. For the life of me, I can’t understand how some people say that automation makes them lazy, the truth is that *they make themselves lazy* by choosing not to over-ride that automation when necessary/appropriate. The answer is not to go back to a 1950’s style of manually adjust everything photography, but to realize when/if you are being lazy and over-ride that piece of equipment in your head which is more dastardly than any custom function number 92 or automated piece of equipment. << I would never encourage anyone to become a pro photographer.  Anyone can invariably earn more money in another career.  But even serious amateur photographers eventually hit a brick wall – and seemingly can go no further with their photography.  When this happens, the cause will often be the same.  Too little learning of new techniques, and too much reliance on equipment automation.  Equipment automation will often prevent one from learning new techniques, and in the long run is really not your friend.  Great photography begins and ends inside the photographer’s own brain, and is a process of problem solving. Computer logic applied to the act of picture taking undoubtedly detracts more than it adds.  It lowers us to the level of chimpanzees or helpless children, doing things for us that are best done by ourselves. Sorry, none of my photos are lowered in quality nor am I lowered to the level of a chimp by relying at times on automation. Equipment doesn’t prevent problem solving, for the curious mind, automated equipment might inspire us to find new, exciting, creative ways to use that automation and make better more creative photographs. Again no computerized camera has ever turned me into a chimp – I was already a chimp/chump before I used a computerized camera. Sincerely Dr. Cornelius, Ape City, Planet of the Apes Taylor: You fear automation and you hate automation, why? Dr. Zaius: The forbidden zone was once a paradise, your breed made a desert of it, ages ago. Taylor: That still doesn’t give me the why, a planet where apes with computerized cameras evolved from men with mechanical cameras? There’s got to be an answer! Dr. Zaius: Don’t look for it Taylor, you may not like what you find… Viva! If you wish to e-mail me just try and disconnect my brain. Have a thought and go ahead, make my day! "Clifford, on your planet, what color is the sky?" "Roads? Where we’re going we don’t need any roads" "1.21 gigawatts! Do they make that in AA?"

Response:

I printed and saved your response as I think it is quite valuable.  I have been personally critical of your views on computers (heck, I am a computer professor!!) but this is valuable and it is obvious you know your photography stuff.

Wow, I would hate to see you respond to a criticism!!!  I already knew your views on computer automation and I guess I disagree to a point.  Sure, some people are dillusional and think that they are great at photography or accounting or finance or whatever because they can operate a computer at a basic level.  At the same time, I know people that 350+ pounds at 6′0" and who don’t think they have an eating problem.  The world is full of people that are kidding themselves. Yet, I know numerous people that are not kidding themselves and they know they are novices at whatever and are trying to get better.  Computers don’t facilitate fantasy (at least not for long), they are just a tool plain and simple and those that want to be true experts, must pay the price.  A simple concept that wise people learn quickly. Anyway, thanks for the flash info, I found it useful. This little treatise offers no advice on how to become a creative photographer.  It only points a finger of accusation at what may be preventing one from being creative, and gratified, and sublime. You’ve got to work the equipment, rather than letting the equipment work you.

– David Olsen

Response:

Gene- I actually got interested and dug out the description of how the flash metering of the EOS-3 works with several speedlights 550EX in wireless E-TTL mode. Interestingly enough it claims that the camera fires a preflash with each flash separately to measure its output and then sets the output of each flash according to the reading that it got for each one and the light ratios that you set on the main flash unit. So it looks to me that you just set the ratio of the main/fill light that you need directly on the main flash unit and then shoot. EOS3 brochure claims to support this operation for up to 4 groups of flashes, so you can set the ratio of up to 4 lights independently.  You’d probably want to set the exposure compensation on the camera to account for the reflectance of your subject but that’s would be about all you’d need to go through.     This strikes me as exactly equivalent to what you do with your flashes maybe sans the flashmeter. In fact, I am sure Canon deliberately made the system work similar to what the a person would do for a good flash shot.   I’d say that if 4 independently adjustable lights is not enough, you definitely are in the studio setting and for that EOS-3 has a PC terminal:) This wireless TTL is probably designed for the applications where you don’t have time to carefully set each light, but rather want to set some lights, set the ratios and fire away. I bet it would work like a charm at a wedding:) I’d dare to say that it is wrong to blame the TTL flash for the poor results sometimes obtained by people. I’d rather say that any system is a only a tool and some tools are easier to use and some are harder to use. I bet you’d get the same results with the TTL flash if you played with one for a bit. people get crappy results with the TTL flash becuase they don’t care about lighting things properly, not because they=ir equipment is bad. People who use studio strobes and flashmeter get good results because they know what they are doing, not because their flashes are superior. Sometimes TTL really saves the day, I’d say for a journalistic situation TTL would be a blessing. At the studio, I’d say the advantages are dubious. Nevertheless modern TTL is a lot more sophisticated that a simple in-camera flash sensor, so please don’t discard it wholesale. The answer to your question of whether "my" TTL flash can do it or not is: yes it probably can, the operation would probably be a bit more straightforward and you would be able to change the aperture if you need without resetiing the whole system. Might be useful for playing with DOF. Would you get a significant advantage using TTL? I doubt it. In the end who cares what you used for a shot as long as you get what you want. Alex P.S. BTW, thanks for the tutorial on the lighting technique! Before you buy.

Response:

Lots of good advice but it somewhat misses the point: he wanted to know how to make his setup work. Spotmetering the subject face and locking the flash exposure (while adjusting for the reflectivity of the human face with exposure compensation) would solve the underexposure problem. 550EX units do have adjustable output (flash compensaion), so he can get the flash ratios dialed in to control the contrast. Same result, less hassle.

I can’t save the whole world, and am not really trying to.  I thought there may be some lurkers reading this thread who have considered home studio portraiture.  Perhaps these people may benefit by hearing some alternative views, however politically incorrect, but coming from an experienced professional about equipment choices and technique. TTL flash is extremely useful in many situations where you don’t have time or desire to run around yor subject with a flashmeter.

I’ll concede that In some situations, TTL flash is marginally more useful than a non-dedicated, automatic flash.  These would be in macro photography, where the reproduction ratio is greater than 1:2.  The other situation is when shooting indoors, and ambient is used as the main light while flash is used as fill.  In all other situations I can think of, a cheapo, generic "automatic" flash will provide the same level of exposure accuracy as TTL flash. Personally I own 3 medium format cameras, 2 Mamiyas and a Bronica.  I use about 4 of my 7 working 35mm camera bodies on a regular basis. These are 15 year old Nikons and Konicas.  I need flash equipment, AC studio strobes and battery powered, which will work equally well with whatever camera equipment I may happen to be using at the moment or may acquire in the future.  I use the same lighting techniques, regardless of the film format and regardless of whether I’m working in the studio or outdoors on location.  If there was a TTL system that would make my work 1 whit easier, I would buy it and take the tax deduction.  It doesn’t exist.   I have 8 battery powered flash units I use on a regular basis.  One of my favorites for outdoor and location work is the now obsolete Sunpak Auto 611.  This is a handle-mount, potato masher type flash which has an honest ASA 100 GN of 160, meaning the maximum brightness is about the same as a 200 watt second monolight.  It has a wonderful remote sensor for auto exposure use, and this remote sensor has a hot-shoe foot and a jack for connecting a sync cord.  In manual mode, the power output is adjustable over an 8 f/stop range.  The design of this flash unit is unique, in that it is the only flash unit in this power class with a remote sensor which has a sync cord jack, and also has the battery power self-contained.  I actually own 4 of these and have high-voltage battery packs for them, but quite often power them with just 4 "C" cell NiMH batteries self-contained in the flashhead battery chamber. I often use this flash with a 12" X 16" Chimera softbox, and mount it on a fully extended 10 foot light stand.  Works great for illuminating groups of 40 or more people – in automatic mode.  The flash unit normally comes with camera mounting bracket.  I twist the camera mounting plate around so it is facing forward in the same direction the flash is firing.  I use a 1/4 X 20 thumbscrew to attach a Stroboframe accessory shoe to the camera mounting plate of the bracket, and put the remote sensor in the shoe, which peers out from under the softbox.  I attach a metal foot to this same  bracket on the flash, and this connects to the accessory shoe on the bracket for the lightstand. I use another 1/4X20 thumbscrew to attach a radio remote slave trigger to the flash bracket.  A sync cord runs from the radio slave receiver to the terminal jack on the remote sensor.  This enables the flash to be used in automatic exposure mode, high up on a light stand, at great distance from the camera.  For example, I recently shot a publicity photo of a  local politician in front of a popular landmark.  This was an unusual looking metal sculpture, about 15′ high.  It had to be a full length body shot, and include the full height of the sculpture. I wanted to use the compression effect of a telephoto lens, to narrow the distance between the man and the sculpture – and make the guy look larger than he really is.  So I used a 200mm lens, and had to back up to quite a distance to get everything into the frame. But I had to light the subject with flash.  I decided to use flash as the main light, and the ambient light as the fill.  So I used a hand-held ambient light meter to determine the exposure for the shadow side of the subject.  Then I set the flash in auto exposure mode to output 2 f/stops more light than the ambient fill.  The film exposure was based on the background illumination, measured with the ambient light meter.  The flash unit, with its 12×16 softbox was about 8 feet up on the lightstand, and about 10 feet away from the subject.  With my 200mm lens, I was standing about 200 feet away.  I took 3 shots, in case of eye blinks or whatever, and they all were perfectly exposed. Now, could this have been done with a TTL flash system or in-camera light metering?  Since I don’t know anything about TTL flash systems, you tell me. Actually, I believe a large number of my clients own a camera with TTL flash capabilities.  Perhaps they hire me only because I am not constrained by TTL flash metering, and am therefore able to make pictures for them which they can’t make for themselves. In wedding photography, it is traditional to shoot "altar returns." These are the formal group photos that are posed on the altar, and normally they immediately follow the ceremony.  I often light these groups with the same light I mentioned before – a Sunpak Auto 611 with a 12X16 softbox, 10 feet up on a light stand.  The softbox has an angle of coverage about the same as a 28mm lens, and the hot spot in the center is only about 3/10ths of an f/stop – so it works quite well for large groups. The problem with alter returns is the dark, under-exposed areas surrounding and behind the group.  These are the areas of the scene which the frontal lighting can’t reach into.  The conventional "professional" solution is to mount the camera on a tripod and "drag the shutter."  Dragging the shutter means using a slow shutter speed, such as 1/8th second, which brings up the brightness level of the ambient light in the background and to the sides of the group. However, I think this ambient light is off-color, drab and boring. And the chance of subject movement at such a slow shutter speed is too great for me to tolerate.   My solution is to place more flash units to the rear of the group pose.  I place a short light stand behind the group.  On this light stand is a simple bracket I made, which mounts 2 Sunpak 383 Super flash units and a radio slave receiver.  The flash units sit in hot shoes, which have their PC sync cords wired together into the same sync circuit.  This enables me to fire both flashes in sync with just 1 radio slave receiver. I have a Sto-fen Omnibounce on one of the flash units, and I aim this toward the back side of the group.  This separates the group from the background, and light spills over into the surrounding areas at the sides of the group.  The second flash is fired toward the rear of the altar, to light up the area behind the group.  I normally set the flash units to automatic mode, f/8, same as my shooting aperture.  It works flawlessly, and creates more impressive looking lighting than most other professionals can achieve. Now, can this type of lighting setup be accomplished with TTL flash equipment?  You tell me.  But that isn’t the only use for my "2 lights on a stick" at weddings.  If the officiant will allow it, I position this outfit at the end of a pew in the church.  I use one flash to backlight the bride as she marches down the aisle on the arm of her father during the processional.  The other flash on this same light stand is aimed toward the far end of the aisle, so it no longer looks like the bride is emerging from a dark cave. At the wedding reception, there is always the problem of lighting the bouquet and garter toss.  To get everything into the scene, you need to compose the bride in the foreground and the group of "catchers" in the background.  With just a single, on-camera light – proper exposure of the bride in the foreground will leave the "catchers" in the background underexposed.  The solution is to use more lights.  I position my "2 lights on a stick" out of camera view but halfway between the bride and the group of catchers.  I aim one light toward the bride, to backlight her.  And I aim the second light toward the assembled group to light them up.  I normally set both of these flash units to automatic mode, but use my on-camera flash to front-light the bride in manual mode.  The net effect is that both the bride, the group of bouquet catchers, and everything inbetween is nicely lit. Can this kind of lighting effect be accomplished with TTL flash equipment?  You tell me. As I mentioned in another recent post, lighting is about creativity and problem solving.  If one constrains themselves to the limitations of TTL equipment, they will accomplish neither.  Indeed, they will forever confine themselves to the ranks of the lame amateurs and the "point & shoot" crowd.  I don’t want to hear about "convenience." Scenes that are lighted "conveniently" are normally not worth shooting to begin with.  Great pictures must be earned, and can not be bought by the photographer with a credit card.  In the final analysis, TTL flash metering is for people who know nothing about lighting technique – and don’t care to learn.  While it is the most important component of photograhy, lighting is the last thing that most photographers ever learn – and most never learn it. One need … read more »

Response:

The PG3001MLB has rougly half the power of a 550EX (105 vs 180).

Those guide numbers for both units are idealized approximations.  In a studio environment, where diffusion devices are being employed, I predict the output of both units will be about the same – within 1/2 f/stop of each other. It doesn’t have a ratio’d modeling light and only has 3 power settings.

It costs $120, and is sufficient or ideal for a home studio.  I sometimes use one, with a gridded snoot attached,  as a hair light in my commercial studio.  For $400, you can get a 400ws monolight, a power proportionate, 250 watt modeling light, and infinately variable power output.  But you will find that the modeling light doesn’t do much for you, you will never use more than 25% of its brightness capability, and you could have spent the money better on something else – such as a second light or a hand-held light meter. The human eye is not sensitive enough to slight changes in brightness levels for modeling lights to be used in making exposure determinations.  The difference in brightness between the modeling lights on the main and fill lights must change by nearly a full f/stop before any change can be detected.  Consequently, modeling lights are very poor predictors of the lighting effect in the final print Alternatively, a digital flash meter measures brightness in 1/10th f/stop increments.  If you really, really, need to know what the lighting effects will be, you shoot the scene with a test exposure on Polaroid film – which is why all medium formal SLRs have a Polaroid film back available.  But if you have a flash meter, you don’t really need modeling lights – for anything.  They are primarily useful for raising the brightness level on the subject to aid in focusing.   And on top of the cost of two of these, you have to buy a flash meter.

Buying a flash meter is not a punishment.  It can be a life-changing event which may elevate one’s understanding of lighting to levels he never knew existed.  All pro studio photographers use hand-held, incident flash meters, and there are none who use TTL flash metering for studio work  Go figure.  OTOH, most folks are going to want a dedicated flash anyway so it’s simply a matter of buying a second one.

I think most folks who want a dedicated flash are not interested in creative lighting, or are hoping to avoid learning it.   Creative lighting in photography is something a credit card can’t buy, and an area where computerization is of very limited use. Using an in-camera light meter can not give accurate results in auto exposure modes, because it does not take reflectance values into account. Duh!  I think most folks know that if you’re taking a picture of a white cat or black dog, you have to compensate.  This is true whether you’re using flash or not.  You can guestimate or meter off a gray card.  It’s really not a big deal.

I’m not talking about white cats and black dogs.  I’m talking about normal skin tones.  If you underexpose a 35mm negative by just 1 full f/stop, this flaw will generally make the resulting prints unsaleable – meaning they will not be pleasing to the eye, even if your goal is not to sell them. And if someone follows your steps 2 & 3, the highlight side of the subject will be over-exposed.  You have the main light set for f8 but you’re adding light from the fill.  Now you’ve gotta go back and reduce the output of both flashes until the overall reading is f8.

I stated the technique correctly.  While not the only one by far, it is a commonly used technique by many studio pros.  I use it every day, and my exposures are consistently accurate to about 3/10th f/stop – as determined by the densitometer readings provided by my lab. In the metering technique i described, I said you aim the translucent dome of the flash meter directly toward the main light.  This is very different from aiming it toward the camera lens.  The goal is to establish an accurate main-to-fill lighting ratio, not to determine the f/stop lens setting for film exposure. In a lighting arrangement set up for short lighting, which is the one most commonly used, the subject is often posed with a 2/3rds view of the face.  In other words, 2/3rd of the subject’s face is facing the camera – and 1/3rd is facing the main light.  In this kind of common lighting arrangement, the main light may be illuminating only 1/3rd of the subject’s face.  The 2/3rds side which is in shadow is illuminated only by ambient light.  If no fill light was used, the shadow side of the subject’s face may be about 5 f/stops darker than the side that is illuminated by flash.  If you base the film exposure on the brightness of the main light falling on the subject’s face, and no fill light was used, the overall negative density will be several f/stops underexposed. In the example I gave, we made the fill light 2 f/stops less bright than the main light.  In other words, the fill is only 1/4th as bright as the main light.  This substantially brightens the shadow side of the subject, but has a very minimal effect in brighting the highlight side of the subject’s face. When you have f/8 light falling on a subject, and add to it another light of equal strength, the correct exposure will be f/11 – for a 1 f/stop gain.  But when you have f/8 light falling on a subject, and add to it another light that is only 1/4th as bright – then the total exposure is about f/8.2 – the increase is by an imperceptable amount. There are some variables that come into play and require human judgement, which is why it would be very difficult to devise a computer algorithm that takes the variables and personal preferences into account. As a final though, I wanted to plainly state that the primary purpose of an incident flash meter is not for determining correct exposure of the film.  It’s main purpose is for accurately establishing brightness ratios between all of the light sources illuminating a scene.  It is only after this is accomplished that one should get interested in how to expose the film.  

Response:

You were doing pretty good until you tried to provide advice on flash units you’ve obviously not used.

That is correct.  I’ve never used a Canon EOS 3 or the 550EX flash units.  One can buy a professional portrait equipment – a good, used medium format camera and real AC powered monolights for way less money than the stuff you’ve got. With but 2 exceptions (Contax RTS III and Leica R8), in-camera light meters are not designed to measure independently the brightness of two or more flash sources lighting a scene. The EOS 3 does indeed do this.

The EOS 3 can do what?  Are you saying it can automatically determine that the main light on a portrait subject’s face is 2 f/stops brighter than the fill light on a portrait subject’s face – and then set the lens aperture to some other arbitrary value?  If not, then you are essentially working in manual mode – and the TTL system serves as nothing more than a needlessly expensive triggering slave. You can spot meter on the subject’s face, which is exactly what I do.

A portrait subject’s face typically has a reflectance value of 35%, instead of the 18% average that the in-camer meter is calibrated for. Consequently, you would need to add 1 f/stop exposure compensation to avoid under exposure. If I’m understanding your technique, you would need to turn off the secondary flash and take a spot meter reading of the main flash alone – on the highlight side of the subject’s face.  The film exposure would be +1 f/stop of exposure compensation added to that.  Next you would need to turn off the main light, and take a spot meter reading of the fill light alone – on the shadow side of the subject’s face. The brightness of the fill light would need to be adjusted until it corresponds to the desired lighting ratio between the fill and main light.  Then the lens aperture and shutter speed are set manually.   Each flash group fires a preflash which is then measured and the total flash output is calculated.

I don’t understand what you mean by "flash group," but this all sounds like bad technique.  The film exposure needs to be based on the brightness of the main light on the subject’s face, and the brightness of the background should not factor into the exposure calculation at all. It’s not a perfect system but it’s a lot better than your approach with the 383’s with which you have to manually calculate/guestimate the overall flash exposure or use an external flash meter.

A Sunpak 383 Super differs from a studio monolight only in that it is powered by batteries, it has no modeling light, and it has no provision for interchangeable reflector bowls, using grids, etc.  But for use with an umbrella, or outdoors portraiture requiring battery power, it can’t be beaten in it’s power class.  Two or four of them can be mounted on the same bracket and fired into the same umbrella to double or quadruple the light output – gaining 1 or 2 f/stops of brightness.  Lumiquest makes a plastic snoot which attaches to the flash with velcro.  This makes an excellent, low-cost, light-weight, wireless hair light which can be triggered with a Wein Peanut optical slave. However, I don’t think independent lights can be mixed into a lighting arrangement with  TTL controlled equipment because the extra lights would affect the in-camera meter reading and lead to under exposure.    In addition, you get modeling flash, stroboscopic flash, and evaluative flash metering for general flash.

What does "general flash" mean?  Is that on-camera flash, which because of its lighting angle and contrast quality is the worst possible lighting one can achieve?  If the direction and contrast quality of your lighting are terrible, along with the garish shadows it produces, what difference does it make if your film is correctly exposed?  This equipment provides a high-tech means of producing terrible looking pictures, which in my opinion is of dubious value. This is a concept that is very difficult to penetrate through thick skulls.  Precise exposure of the film and negative density are of secondary importance.  It is the "quality" of the lighting that makes or breaks the picture, and consideration to negative density should come last in priority. The lighting on a scene has direction, color, contrast quality and brightness.  Brightness is the only one of these 4 factors which has any affect on exposing the film, but it is of zero importance in establishing the dramatic quality or mood of the scene.  It is the other 3 factors – the direction, color and contrast quality of the light, along with the interplay of highlight and shadow, which determine whether the picture is interesting or boring.   A perfectly exposed negative that records boring lighting can produce nothing except a print that is destined for the trashcan.  First, learn to control the lighting to create interesting and artistic effects – and let the negative density take care of itself.  Do not compromise your ability to control the light – simply to gain more ease in correctly exposing the film.  A negative is nothing more than a record.  Do not let it be a good record of a badly lighted scene.

Response:

I printed and saved your response as I think it is quite valuable.  I have been personally critical of your views on computers (heck, I am a computer professor!!) but this is valuable and it is obvious you know your photography stuff.

I don’t know why people think I am averse to computers or automation. When I bought my first Atari computer about 15 years ago, and began teaching myself desktop publishing and graphics animation, I instantly realized that a computer can enable a person to do things they otherwise wouldn’t be able to do.  There is a synergy between the man and the machine, which enables the man to be more than he was before. However, there are some things that are simply too important to automate.  Examples might be a man making love to his wife, or spanking his children.  While these unpleasant functions could undoubtedly be automated with computer logic and robotics, the question would be why?  To what end?  Automating these functions would make the man less than he was before, not more. I feel the same way about operating a camera, or lighting equipment. It is too important to be left to computers, and when it is automated it diminishes the photographer and the value of what he creates with his equipment.  I would be insulted if someone viewed one of my photographs and assumed it was the result of computer logic.   If a person requires computerized equipment to make his photographs, that it fine.  The computer can make him more than he was without it. But he should use no more automation than his existing skills require, or the automation will diminish him instead of enabling him to grow. I strongly feel that the more skilled and knowledgeable a photographer becomes, the less inclined he is to use automation.  The source of pride in his work is the skills and knowledge that enable him to produce photographs without computer assistance.  Nobody rides a bicycle with training wheels, if he is able to ride without them. I believe a person learns more about the fundamentals of photography, and learns them faster, by using non-computerized equipment.  Indeed, the more one relies on automation the less he sees the need to learn the fundamentals.  The computerized camera user may never see the err of his ways until perhaps 20 years have passed, and he realizes that he has never taken a "creative" picture – and that he has spent all of that time and money outputting the mundane snapshots which an anonymous Japanese software engineer programmed into his equipment. Perhaps it is only after the photographer has filled up his garage with shoeboxes full of mundane snapshots, which have been looked at only once and are worthy or nothing more, that he realizes that computerized camera gear was a siren’s song which wasted his time and money and produced nothing of value – for himself or anyone else.  At least, that is what happened to me.  It was only after I overcame my love of equipment automation that I was able to go beyond the brick wall that was keeping me from producing professional quality work.  It was only by developing a love for learning and applying technique, rather than relying on electronic gadgetry, that I was able to become a successful professional  - esteemed within my own community for the ability to produce predictably fine work. I would never encourage anyone to become a pro photographer.  Anyone can invariably earn more money in another career.  But even serious amateur photographers eventually hit a brick wall – and seemingly can go no further with their photography.  When this happens, the cause will often be the same.  Too little learning of new techniques, and too much reliance on equipment automation.  Equipment automation will often prevent one from learning new techniques, and in the long run is really not your friend.  Great photography begins and ends inside the photographer’s own brain, and is a process of problem solving. Computer logic applied to the act of picture taking undoubtedly detracts more than it adds.  It lowers us to the level of chimpanzees or helpless children, doing things for us that are best done by ourselves. This little treatise offers no advice on how to become a creative photographer.  It only points a finger of accusation at what may be preventing one from being creative, and gratified, and sublime. You’ve got to work the equipment, rather than letting the equipment work you.

Response:

Each flash group fires a preflash which is then measured and the total flash output is calculated. I don’t understand what you mean by "flash group," but this all sounds like bad technique.  In addition, you get modeling flash, stroboscopic flash, and evaluative flash metering for general flash. What does "general flash" mean?  Is that on-camera flash, which because of its lighting angle and contrast quality is the worst possible lighting one can achieve?

Gene, From those two comments you made, you’ve shown again you have no prior experience with the 550EX flash which you had already admitted. Flash group is the grouping of slave flash guns with the 550/420EX. And ‘general flash’ is referring to general usage of 550EX flash. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with your method of lighting. It is the fact that the original poster has Canon equipments already and I believe he wants advice on how to make full use of the 550EX and EOS3, rather than buying all the new equipments you’ve mentioned. Just my 2 cents Alex

Response:

The PG3001MLB has rougly half the power of a 550EX (105 vs 180).  It doesn’t have a ratio’d modeling light and only has 3 power settings.  And on top of the cost of two of these, you have to buy a flash meter.  OTOH, most folks are going to want a dedicated flash anyway so it’s simply a matter of buying a second one. Using an in-camera light meter can not give accurate results in auto exposure modes, because it does not take reflectance values into account.

Duh!  I think most folks know that if you’re taking a picture of a white cat or black dog, you have to compensate.  This is true whether you’re using flash or not.  You can guestimate or meter off a gray card.  It’s really not a big deal. And if someone follows your steps 2 & 3, the highlight side of the subject will be over-exposed.  You have the main light set for f8 but you’re adding light from the fill.  Now you’ve gotta go back and reduce the output of both flashes until the overall reading is f8.  It’s far easier to just spot meter on the main light side and let the camera handle it. Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I can’t see much difference between a backlight and a kicker light from this description. Could you explain please? A backlight is normally positioned directly behind the subject, and is firing forward toward the back side of the subject.  It is positioned between the subject and the backdrop, and is blocked from view by the camera by the subject’s body.  If you send me an E-mail requesting it, I’ll send a .jpeg file illustrating the effect of backlighting. Kicker lights, also known as accent lights, are normally positioned to the rear of the subject’s position – but not directly behind the subject.  They are off to one side, and the light strikes the subject at an angle.  For example, you may have your subject posed in front of a solid black background.  Since you want the background to be black, use of a background light would defeat your intentions.  But your subject may have black hair and be wearing a dark colored shirt.  In this case, the subject’s face may appear to be floating in a sea of blackness.  The subject’s black hair will blend into the black background, and can’t be distinguished from it. In this example, you could position a kicker light high and to one side behind the subject.  The light would descend on the subject from a rearward angle, which separates the subject from the background. Care must be taken so that this light does not fall on the subject’s face.  A hair light is intended to simply create a bright spot on the subject’s hair, which also separates the subject’s head from the background.  But a kicker light, as I’ve explained it here, is intended to light the entire subject from the rear and one side.  If you want, you can position a hair light on one side of the subject – and a kicker light on the other side.  The kicker light may be 1 f/stop less bright than the main light, and the hair light may be 1 f/stop brighter than the main light. But how would using ND gel differ from using ratio control on the 550EXs? As I understand it, the ratio control enables you to make the secondary flash more or less bright than the main flash by a specific amount.  But the ratio control used with the 550EXs does not take into account the flash to subject distance, and thus can’t know how much light is falling on the subject – shadow side versus highlight side of the subject’s face.  However, if you keep both flash units an equal distance from the subject, and you use the same kind of softboxes on both flash units, the system should give predictable results. Using an in-camera light meter can not give accurate results in auto exposure modes, because it does not take reflectance values into account.  Reflected light meters are calibrated with the assumption that the objected they are metering has an average reflectance value, which is 18% reflectance.  Caucasion skin has a reflectance value, typically, of 35%.  Consequently, if you take a meter reading off of the subject’s face and then use that reading to expose the film – the negative will be underexposed by 1 f/stop.  The faces of light or dark skinned people don’t have the same reflectance values, and you can’t know how much exposure compensation to dial into your camera unless these reflectance values are known and valued in relation to the 18% average. An incident light meter completely bypasses the issue of subject reflectance, and measures the light falling onto the scene – instead of the light being reflected from the scene.  Consequently, it provides more reliable and useable exposure readings – without any need to compensate for subjects that are lighter or darker than average. In professional studio portraiture, the metering technique is accomplished like this: 1.  First, determine what lens aperture you want to shoot at.  This will depend on what focal length of lens you are using, how much depth of field you need to keep all of the subject in focus, and how sharply focused you want to render the background.  For purposes of illustration, let’s say you want to shoot at f/8 – which is typical. 2.  Next, position your main light to achieve the highlight and shadow effects that you want.  Typically, 30 to 45 degrees away from the camera to subject axis is a good starting point.  Elevate the main light so it is higher than the subject’s head, and the light is falling on the subject from a downward angle. From the portrait subject’s position, aim the translucent dome of the incident flash meter directly toward the main light.  Fire the flash, and see what exposure reading you get.  Then, increase or decrease the power of the flash and take repeated meter readings until you get the brightness level you want.  If you want to use a lens aperture of f/8, you can make the brightness of the main light f/8. 3.  Next, position the fill light somewhere near the camera to subject axis.  Decide how much less bright than the main light you want the fill light to be.  For example, you may want the fill light to be 2 f/stops less bright than the main light, so the exposure value should be f/4.  Turn off the main light so it can’t influence your meter reading for the fill light.  From the portrait subject’s position, aim the dome of the flash meter directly toward the fill light.  Fire the fill light flash unit, and read the exposure value on the meter. Adjust the power level of the fill light flash until you get a meter reading of f/4. 4.  Any other lights you may have in your lighting arrangement are metered in the same way.  The brightness of each light must be metered and adjusted one at a time, and independent of the others. If you have a hair light, it’s brightness must be based on the reflectance of the subject’s hair.  But typically, you can make it 1 f/stop brighter than the main light.  In this example, it should be f/11.  To take the meter reading, you sit in the subject’s position and lay the flash meter on top of your head with the dome pointed toward the hair light. 5.  Finally, the issue of film exposure and negative density.  Slide film is more tolerant of underexposure than overexposure, so we use the principle "expose for the highlights, and let the shadows fall where they may.  You don’t want the detail to be burned out of the highlights on your subject.  So if you are shooting slide film, set the lens aperture to the same exposure value as your main light – f/8 in this example. The opposite of slide film, negatives are more tolerant of overexposure than under exposure.  Underexposure causes you to lose detail in the shadow areas – for example if your subject is wearing a black or dark shirt.  So the rule of thumb with negative film is "expose for the shadows, and let the highlights fall where they may. With negative film, you can usually set the lens aperture for the same exposure value as the main light and get satisfactory results.  But if your fill light is 2 or more f/stops less bright than the main light, you can get better shadow detail by giving the film more exposure.  So you set the lens aperture to a value that is half-way between the the main light at f/8 and the fill light at f/4 – which would be f/5.6 in this case.  If you want to shoot at f/8 for depth of field reasons, you would need to make the brightness of the main light f/11 and the fill light f/5.6 This is the standard technique used by studio professionals, and will give perfect results every time – which is what the clients expect. If you think you can accomplish the same thing with TTL flash metering equipment – good luck. Shutterbug is a good magazine, if you read the advertisements and ignore the camera reviews.  Shutterbug always has an advertisement by Photographer’s Warehouse, who sells low cost studio lighting equipment.  They have a Model PG3001MLB studio monolight, which sells for $120.  This has about the same maximum brightness output as a Canon 550EX, which is ample for a home studio.  It is AC powered, so you don’t have to worry about batteries – and it recycles to full power in about 3 seconds.  It has a modeling light, a bracket for mounting it to a light stand and holding an umbrella, and a built-in optical slave.  It’s brightness is adjustable over a 3 f/stop range. It has a number of low-cost accessories available, such as grids, a snoot, gel holder, and several sizes of softboxes.  The point is, this is way more useful, versatile and convenient to use for portraiture than the 550EX – and it costs way less. If

… read more »

Response:

Gene- Lots of good advice but it somewhat misses the point: he wanted to know how to make his setup work. Spotmetering the subject face and locking the flash exposure (while adjusting for the reflectivity of the human face with exposure compensation) would solve the underexposure problem. 550EX units do have adjustable output (flash compensaion), so he can get the flash ratios dialed in to control the contrast. Same result, less hassle. TTL flash is extremely useful in amny situations where you don’t have time or desire to run around yor subject with a flashmeter. Using a cheap off-camera TTL flash cord and bouncing flash will improve the quality of the light quite a lot.  I’d say the appeal of modern technology is that it simplifies some tasks and lets you do something that you couldn’t do before (TTL flash relates more to the first statement). Alex Before you buy.

Response:

I’ve been shooting portraits with 2 550EXs (using small Photoflex softboxes) and the EOS-3 with my subjects in front of a black or medium grey background (in a moderately lit room with overhead fluorescent lights) and have experienced unsatisfactory results. Usually, if my shots are tightly composed around the subjects face, the results are fairly good; however, if I place more of the background in the shot, the results are usually overexposed. I’ve attempted aperture priority, shutter priority, flash exposure, and camera exposure compensation to no avail. From what I gather, the automation designed in EOS-3 and the 550s is not lighting the shots so much as it’s supplementing the existing ambient light. Is there a solution to my dilemma, or do I need to go the route of more expense with mono lights and a light meter? Thank you in advance for any assistance. Please reply via e-mail as well as posting to this forum. Jerry Bezdikian

Response:

The solution is to not use program mode.  When I’m using the same set up, I set the camera to manual, the shutter speed to 1/125 and the aperture to f8. I then take an existing light reading from a gray card and another from a part of the subject that will always be in the picture (usually the face) and dial in the difference as flash exposure compensation. When shooting, I spot meter on the subject’s face and press the FEL button to lock in the exposure.  I then recompose and take the shot.  This approach will ensure that your subject is perfectly exposed and the background will be whatever it is depending on how much light is falling on it. However, I don’t know why your pictures are over-exposed.  Even in program mode, the camera should be metering on the subject, assuming that’s where the focusing point is located.  Using FEL will solve this.  Another possibility is that your photo lab’s equipment is just averaging out the entire scene which makes your subject look over exposed.  Shooting a roll of slide film will eliminate this variable and tell you what’s really happening. You definitely don’t need mono-lights and a light meter to get great flash pictures with the EOS 3. Paul

… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve been shooting portraits with 2 550EXs (using small Photoflex softboxes) and the EOS-3 with my subjects in front of a black or medium grey background (in a moderately lit room with overhead fluorescent lights) and have experienced unsatisfactory results. Usually, if my shots are tightly composed around the subjects face, the results are fairly good; however, if I place more of the background in the shot, the results are usually overexposed. I’ve attempted aperture priority, shutter priority, flash exposure, and camera exposure compensation to no avail. From what I gather, the automation designed in EOS-3 and the 550s is not lighting the shots so much as it’s supplementing the existing ambient light. Is there a solution to my dilemma, or do I need to go the route of more expense with mono lights and a light meter? Thank you in advance for any assistance. Please reply via e-mail as well as posting to this forum. Jerry Bezdikian

Response:

It’s difficult to diagnose the problem long distance. In AV mode, the camera should produce a well exposed subject and background, though the synch speed may be quite long. If you were getting under exposure, I would say too much light loss due to the softboxes. Try shooting the same situation without the softboxes. How are you wiring the two flash units? Check the flash owner’s manual to see if you have done something wrong. Perhaps someone has another theory. Peter Burian

Response:

I’ve been shooting portraits with 2 550EXs (using small Photoflex softboxes) and the EOS-3 with my subjects in front of a black or medium grey background (in a moderately lit room with overhead fluorescent lights) and have experienced unsatisfactory results. Usually, if my shots are tightly composed around the subjects face, the results are fairly good; however, if I place more of the background in the shot, the results are usually overexposed.

If your shots are over-exposed, it is because your in-camera light meter is reading too much of the black background area behind your subject and assuming it is neutral grey with an average (18%) reflectance value.  Black reflects only 5 or 10 % of the light falling on it, so the light meter will erroneously add 1 or 2 f/stops more exposure to provide negative density which equals 18% gray.  In summary, your over-exposed results indicate you are metering too much background and not enough subject. You have a long way to go in reaching your destination, and you seem to have started out by heading off in the wrong direction. In the first place, producing a negative of sufficient density to make a good print is not even the objective.  A good negative is taken for granted, and in the game of portraiture will not even get you to the starting line.  Let’s just skip over that for now, and revisit this issue later. In conventional portraiture, the goal is to control the brightness of light falling on all the different parts of the scene – the main subject, the background, and the foreground and props if there are any.  Through clever use of a bunch of reflectors, this can all be done with just one light source.  But you gain more control and versatility by using multiple light sources which can have their brightness adjusted independent of the others. Two lights are normally used to light the subject’s face.  The brightest one is called the main light, and it creates the highlights and shadows on the subject’s face.  A second light is used to lighten or "fill in" the shadows created by the main light, and thus it is called the fill light.  The principal goal of portrait lighting is to control the brightness ratio between the main light and the fill light on the subject’s face.  If you can’t do that, simply producing a negative of proper density for making a good print is irrelevant. Typical head and shoulders portraits (in color) have the main light between 1 and 3 f/stops brighter than the fill light.  A wide ratio produces a more dramatic look, but may look terrible if reduced to halftone newspaper reproduction or digitally scanned.  So the lighting ratio you try to achieve is a matter of personal taste, and ultimately depends what the print will be used for.  But the point is, if you can’t control the brightness of the main light and the fill light independent of each other – you’ve got nothing. Though not always necessary, a 3rd light is often used to light the backdrop.  The brightness of this light also needs to be independently adjustable, so the background can be made 1 f/stop brighter or 1 f/stop darker than the main light on the subject’s face.  How bright you make the background depends on whether you are trying to achieve a low key, mid key or high key effect. Another separate light is often used as a hair light.  This is normally suspended on a boom over the subject’s head, and is intended to create highlights on the subject’s hair that create separation between the subject’s head and the background.  The brightness of the hairlight is normally the same as the main light, or 1 or 2 f/stops. brighter.  How bright you make the hairlight depends on the color of the subject’s hair, whether it is blonde, black or somewhere inbetween.  The darker the subject’s hair, the brighter you need to make the hair light. A backlight is used to illuminate the subject from the rear, which creates a bright rim around the shoulders and highlights to the tips of the hair.  Kicker lights are also positioned to the rear of the subject, and fire forward to create highlights on the sides of the hair, or sides of the face, or on props which may be included in the scene. So counting the main light, the fill light, the background light, the hair light, the backlight and 2 kicker lights – you may have a total 7 different lights in your portrait lighting setup.  Of course, you don’t need all of that in the beginning.  You can make very professional looking portraits with just 1 flash for the main light and a silver reflector for the fill light.  But you can’t do anything in portraiture unless you have some way of controlling the brightness of the fill light in relation to the main light – and you can’t control it unless you can measure it. With but 2 exceptions (Contax RTS III and Leica R8), in-camera light meters are not designed to measure independently the brightness of two or more flash sources lighting a scene.  The best you can hope for is that it will average out the various intensities of all the light it sees, and produce a negative of average density.  But it is no help at all if you are attempting to make the main light 2 f/stops brighter than the fill light, the hair light 1 f/stop brighter than the main light, and the background light 1 f/stop darker than the main light. An in-camera  light meter has no way of measuring these values independently of each other.  This is the issue of "measuring." Next is the issue of "control."  While TTL flash metering normally works pretty well with a single, on-camera flash – it is both prohibitively expensive and woefully inadequate for controlling multiple light sources.  While the EOS3 is one of the few cameras that allows designating a main and secondary flash, and can produce a different brightness level from each, there is no useful way for the in-camera meter to measure the main/fill lighting ratio on a portrait subject’s face.  Seemingly, one would would need to experiment by trial and error – and use a tape measurer to adjust the flash to subject distance.  This expensive, high-tech solution  is more primitive and inconvenient than using fully manual flash units. Instead of buying the pricy 550EX flash units in order to gain the worthless TTL capability, one would be far better off with the $70 Sunpak 383 Super flash units.  These have a switch for manually adjusting the brightness in 1 f/stop increments over a 5 f/stop range – just like a "real" studio monolight.  They also have a calculator scale which indicates the brightness level (f/stop) for any given power level and flash to subject distance. Assuming one had 2 Sunpak 383 Supers instead of 2 550EX, setting up a portrait lighting arrangement is as easy as pie.  You could simply position your main light 7 feet away from the subject.  Assuming ASA 100 film, when you look at the exposure calculator it will indicate the brightness on your subject will be f/16.  But you decide you want your main light to be f/11, so you set the power switch to 1/2 power – and the calculator now indicates f/11 is the brightness level. You would then set up the 2nd 383 Super on a light stand, also 7 feet from the subject but near the camera.  You want the fill light to be 2 f/stops less bright than the main light, so you set the power level switch to 1/8th power.  Check the calculator, and sure enough it says f/5.6.  Now, set the lens aperture to the point that is half-way between the main light (f/11) and the fill light (f/5.6) – which is f/8.  F/8 is your working aperture, so you set that on the camera in manual mode.  Set the shutter speed to 1/125th sec – and shoot.  You will have a perfectly exposed negative, and your main to fill lighting ratio is perfectly controlled.  If you want a wider lighting ratio, simply change the power level switch on the fill light to 1/16th power – and the brightness of your fill light will be f/4. The Sunpak 383 Super flash units come with a 12" PC tipped flash sync cord.  Plug a $15 Wein Peanut optical slave into the PC tip of the fill flash.  For $20, you can buy a 15′ Paramount sync cord that plugs into the jack on the main flash with one end, and has a connector plug that slides into the camera’s hot shoe on the other end.  So for less than $200, which is less than the cost of just 1 Canon 550EX, you can have a 2 light portrait setup that is way more versatile and convenient to work with.  And these Sunpak 383 Supers work just as well as background lights, hair lights, kicker lights, etc.  You can add as many as you want.   Of course, you can get much more accurate brightness levels by making the power adjustments based on the readings of a hand-held flash meter.  By avoiding the purchase of TTL enabled equipment, one can pay for a flash meter out of the savings. Now, your challenge is to get your high-tech 550EX flash units to emulate the low-tech flash units you should have bought in the first place.  My suggestion is to buy some neutral density gel material. You can buy this in 12" square sheets for about $5 each.  B&H Photo and Porters Camera Store has it.  Cut the neutral density gel material into little rectangular strips which can be secured in front of the reflectors of the flash units with rubber bands. Position both the main and the fill light an equal distance away from the subject, 7 feet is a good starting point.  If you’re using a 100mm lens on the camera the fill light will be very near your lens, so use a lens shade.  Do whatever you have to do with the 550EX flash units to get them both to output full power.  Each thickness of neutral density gel will reduce the flash brightness by one f/stop, so put 2 of them on the fill light.  This will make the fill light 2 f/stops less bright than the main light.  If you want the main light to be only 1 f/stop brighter, just put 1 thickness of neutral density gel on the fill light. The little softboxes … read more »

Response:

question to Paul… you had said…"Shooting a roll of slide film will eliminate this variable and tell you what’s really happening."  How is this so? Thanks in advance for info. Derrick – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The solution is to not use program mode.  When I’m using the same set up, I set the camera to manual, the shutter speed to 1/125 and the aperture to f8. I then take an existing light reading from a gray card and another from a part of the subject that will always be in the picture (usually the face) and dial in the difference as flash exposure compensation. When shooting, I spot meter on the subject’s face and press the FEL button to lock in the exposure.  I then recompose and take the shot.  This approach will ensure that your subject is perfectly exposed and the background will be whatever it is depending on how much light is falling on it. However, I don’t know why your pictures are over-exposed.  Even in program mode, the camera should be metering on the subject, assuming that’s where the focusing point is located.  Using FEL will solve this.  Another possibility is that your photo lab’s equipment is just averaging out the entire scene which makes your subject look over exposed.  Shooting a roll of slide film will eliminate this variable and tell you what’s really happening. You definitely don’t need mono-lights and a light meter to get great flash pictures with the EOS 3. Paul

208.s1270.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … I’ve been shooting portraits with 2 550EXs (using small Photoflex softboxes) and the EOS-3 with my subjects in front of a black or medium grey background (in a moderately lit room with overhead fluorescent lights) and have experienced unsatisfactory results. Usually, if my shots are tightly composed around the subjects face, the results are fairly good; however, if I place more of the background in the shot, the results are usually overexposed. I’ve attempted aperture priority, shutter priority, flash exposure, and camera exposure compensation to no avail. From what I gather, the automation designed in EOS-3 and the 550s is not lighting the shots so much as it’s supplementing the existing ambient light. Is there a solution to my dilemma, or do I need to go the route of more expense with mono lights and a light meter? Thank you in advance for any assistance. Please reply via e-mail as well as posting to this forum. Jerry Bezdikian

Before you buy.

Response:

You were doing pretty good until you tried to provide advice on flash units you’ve obviously not used. With but 2 exceptions (Contax RTS III and Leica R8), in-camera light meters are not designed to measure independently the brightness of two or more flash sources lighting a scene.

The EOS 3 does indeed do this. While the EOS3 is one of the few cameras that allows designating a main and secondary flash, and can produce a different brightness level from each, there is no useful way for the in-camera meter to measure the main/fill lighting ratio on a portrait subject’s face.  Seemingly, one would would need to experiment by trial and error – and use a tape measurer to adjust the flash to subject distance.  This expensive, high-tech solution  is more primitive and inconvenient than using fully manual flash units.

You can spot meter on the subject’s face, which is exactly what I do.  Each flash group fires a preflash which is then measured and the total flash output is calculated.  Regardless of whether you’re using the bare flash, an umbrella, softbox, or some combination you’ll get perfectly exposed negatives. It’s not a perfect system but it’s a lot better than your approach with the 383’s with which you have to manually calculate/guestimate the overall flash exposure or use an external flash meter.  In addition, you get modeling flash, stroboscopic flash, and evaluative flash metering for general flash pictures. Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If your shots are over-exposed, it is because your in-camera light meter is reading too much of the black background area behind your subject and assuming it is neutral grey with an average (18%) reflectance value.  Black reflects only 5 or 10 % of the light falling on it, so the light meter will erroneously add 1 or 2 f/stops more exposure to provide negative density which equals 18% gray.  In summary, your over-exposed results indicate you are metering too much background and not enough subject. You have a long way to go in reaching your destination, and you seem to have started out by heading off in the wrong direction. In the first place, producing a negative of sufficient density to make a good print is not even the objective.  A good negative is taken for granted, and in the game of portraiture will not even get you to the starting line.  Let’s just skip over that for now, and revisit this issue later. In conventional portraiture, the goal is to control the brightness of light falling on all the different parts of the scene – the main subject, the background, and the foreground and props if there are any.  Through clever use of a bunch of reflectors, this can all be done with just one light source.  But you gain more control and versatility by using multiple light sources which can have their brightness adjusted independent of the others. Two lights are normally used to light the subject’s face.  The brightest one is called the main light, and it creates the highlights and shadows on the subject’s face.  A second light is used to lighten or "fill in" the shadows created by the main light, and thus it is called the fill light.  The principal goal of portrait lighting is to control the brightness ratio between the main light and the fill light on the subject’s face.  If you can’t do that, simply producing a negative of proper density for making a good print is irrelevant. Typical head and shoulders portraits (in color) have the main light between 1 and 3 f/stops brighter than the fill light.  A wide ratio produces a more dramatic look, but may look terrible if reduced to halftone newspaper reproduction or digitally scanned.  So the lighting ratio you try to achieve is a matter of personal taste, and ultimately depends what the print will be used for.  But the point is, if you can’t control the brightness of the main light and the fill light independent of each other – you’ve got nothing. Though not always necessary, a 3rd light is often used to light the backdrop.  The brightness of this light also needs to be independently adjustable, so the background can be made 1 f/stop brighter or 1 f/stop darker than the main light on the subject’s face.  How bright you make the background depends on whether you are trying to achieve a low key, mid key or high key effect. Another separate light is often used as a hair light.  This is normally suspended on a boom over the subject’s head, and is intended to create highlights on the subject’s hair that create separation between the subject’s head and the background.  The brightness of the hairlight is normally the same as the main light, or 1 or 2 f/stops. brighter.  How bright you make the hairlight depends on the color of the subject’s hair, whether it is blonde, black or somewhere inbetween.  The darker the subject’s hair, the brighter you need to make the hair light. A backlight is used to illuminate the subject from the rear, which creates a bright rim around the shoulders and highlights to the tips of the hair.  Kicker lights are also positioned to the rear of the subject, and fire forward to create highlights on the sides of the hair, or sides of the face, or on props which may be included in the scene. So counting the main light, the fill light, the background light, the hair light, the backlight and 2 kicker lights – you may have a total 7 different lights in your portrait lighting setup.  Of course, you don’t need all of that in the beginning.  You can make very professional looking portraits with just 1 flash for the main light and a silver reflector for the fill light.  But you can’t do anything in portraiture unless you have some way of controlling the brightness of the fill light in relation to the main light – and you can’t control it unless you can measure it. With but 2 exceptions (Contax RTS III and Leica R8), in-camera light meters are not designed to measure independently the brightness of two or more flash sources lighting a scene.  The best you can hope for is that it will average out the various intensities of all the light it sees, and produce a negative of average density.  But it is no help at all if you are attempting to make the main light 2 f/stops brighter than the fill light, the hair light 1 f/stop brighter than the main light, and the background light 1 f/stop darker than the main light. An in-camera  light meter has no way of measuring these values independently of each other.  This is the issue of "measuring." Next is the issue of "control."  While TTL flash metering normally works pretty well with a single, on-camera flash – it is both prohibitively expensive and woefully inadequate for controlling multiple light sources.  While the EOS3 is one of the few cameras that allows designating a main and secondary flash, and can produce a different brightness level from each, there is no useful way for the in-camera meter to measure the main/fill lighting ratio on a portrait subject’s face.  Seemingly, one would would need to experiment by trial and error – and use a tape measurer to adjust the flash to subject distance.  This expensive, high-tech solution  is more primitive and inconvenient than using fully manual flash units. Instead of buying the pricy 550EX flash units in order to gain the worthless TTL capability, one would be far better off with the $70 Sunpak 383 Super flash units.  These have a switch for manually adjusting the brightness in 1 f/stop increments over a 5 f/stop range – just like a "real" studio monolight.  They also have a calculator scale which indicates the brightness level (f/stop) for any given power level and flash to subject distance. Assuming one had 2 Sunpak 383 Supers instead of 2 550EX, setting up a portrait lighting arrangement is as easy as pie.  You could simply position your main light 7 feet away from the subject.  Assuming ASA 100 film, when you look at the exposure calculator it will indicate the brightness on your subject will be f/16.  But you decide you want your main light to be f/11, so you set the power switch to 1/2 power – and the calculator now indicates f/11 is the brightness level. You would then set up the 2nd 383 Super on a light stand, also 7 feet from the subject but near the camera.  You want the fill light to be 2 f/stops less bright than the main light, so you set the power level switch to 1/8th power.  Check the calculator, and sure enough it says f/5.6.  Now, set the lens aperture to the point that is half-way between the main light (f/11) and the fill light (f/5.6) – which is f/8.  F/8 is your working aperture, so you set that on the camera in manual mode.  Set the shutter speed to 1/125th sec – and shoot.  You will have a perfectly exposed negative, and your main to fill lighting ratio is perfectly controlled.  If you want a wider lighting ratio, simply change the power level switch on the fill light to 1/16th power – and the brightness of your fill light will be f/4. The Sunpak 383 Super flash units come with a 12" PC tipped flash sync cord.  Plug a $15 Wein Peanut optical slave into the PC tip of the fill flash.  For $20, you can buy a 15′ Paramount sync cord that plugs into the jack on the main flash with one end, and has a connector plug that slides into the camera’s hot shoe on the other end.  So for less than $200, which is less than the cost of just 1 Canon 550EX, you can have a 2 light portrait setup that is way more versatile and convenient to work with.  And these Sunpak 383 Supers work just as well as background lights, hair lights, kicker lights, etc.  You can add as many as you want.   Of course, you can get much more accurate brightness levels by

… read more »

Response:

If his photo lab’s equipment/operator is evaluating the entire negative and I deliberately had left the background dark,  then in my print the subject is going to be over-exposed event though it’s exposed correctly on the negative.  A slide will tell you that. I had a similar problem.  It appeared that ratio control with my 550EX’s wasn’t working.  Turned out the lab’s equpment was compensating for the shadow areas that were supposed to be there. Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – question to Paul… you had said…"Shooting a roll of slide film will eliminate this variable and tell you what’s really happening."  How is this so? Thanks in advance for info. Derrick The solution is to not use program mode.  When I’m using the same set up, I set the camera to manual, the shutter speed to 1/125 and the aperture to f8. I then take an existing light reading from a gray card and another from a part of the subject that will always be in the picture (usually the face) and dial in the difference as flash exposure compensation. When shooting, I spot meter on the subject’s face and press the FEL button to lock in the exposure.  I then recompose and take the shot.  This approach will ensure that your subject is perfectly exposed and the background will be whatever it is depending on how much light is falling on it. However, I don’t know why your pictures are over-exposed.  Even in program mode, the camera should be metering on the subject, assuming that’s where the focusing point is located.  Using FEL will solve this.  Another possibility is that your photo lab’s equipment is just averaging out the entire scene which makes your subject look over exposed.  Shooting a roll of slide film will eliminate this variable and tell you what’s really happening. You definitely don’t need mono-lights and a light meter to get great flash pictures with the EOS 3. Paul 208.s1270.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com … I’ve been shooting portraits with 2 550EXs (using small Photoflex softboxes) and the EOS-3 with my subjects in front of a black or medium grey background (in a moderately lit room with overhead fluorescent lights) and have experienced unsatisfactory results. Usually, if my shots are tightly composed around the subjects face, the results are fairly good; however, if I place more of the background in the shot, the results are usually overexposed. I’ve attempted aperture priority, shutter priority, flash exposure, and camera exposure compensation to no avail. From what I gather, the automation designed in EOS-3 and the 550s is not lighting the shots so much as it’s supplementing the existing ambient light. Is there a solution to my dilemma, or do I need to go the route of more expense with mono lights and a light meter? Thank you in advance for any assistance. Please reply via e-mail as well as posting to this forum. Jerry Bezdikian Before you buy.

Response:

I think a backlight and a kicker are essentially the same thing.  However, some times other accent lights are added but this is way beyond my abilities at this point.  I’m just using a main, fill, hair light, and background light. But how would using ND gel differ from using ratio control on the 550EXs?

Using ratio control would be too easy. Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m trying to learn more about portrait lighting, so this post was very useful for me. Thanks. A backlight is used to illuminate the subject from the rear, which creates a bright rim around the shoulders and highlights to the tips of the hair.  Kicker lights are also positioned to the rear of the subject, and fire forward to create highlights on the sides of the hair, or sides of the face, or on props which may be included in the scene. I can’t see much difference between a backlight and a kicker light from this description. Could you explain please? Position both the main and the fill light an equal distance away from the subject, 7 feet is a good starting point.  If you’re using a 100mm lens on the camera the fill light will be very near your lens, so use a lens shade.  Do whatever you have to do with the 550EX flash units to get them both to output full power.  Each thickness of neutral density gel will reduce the flash brightness by one f/stop, so put 2 of them on the fill light.  This will make the fill light 2 f/stops less bright than the main light.  If you want the main light to be only 1 f/stop brighter, just put 1 thickness of neutral density gel on the fill light. But how would using ND gel differ from using ratio control on the 550EXs? Pat — Photos at http://www.pchaney.demon.co.uk/

Response:

I had a similar problem.  It appeared that ratio control with my 550EX’s wasn’t working.  Turned out the lab’s equpment was compensating for the shadow areas that were supposed to be there. Do they do that for specific areas of the print then? It’s always appeared to me that the compensation has just been applied to the overall print exposure.

When the negative is fed through the film gate of the printing machine, an automatic exposure meter reading of that negative is taken.  This is much like an in-camera light meter which takes an average reading of a scene you are photographing.  If the negative contains large areas that are lighter or darker than average, this will falsely bias the print paper exposure time toward over or under exposure. Studio portraits often have a background that is deliberately lighter or darker than average – often pure white or pure black.  And the background may occupy a larger surface area on the negative than the subject’s face – thus biasing the average.  Consequently, your negative could have been perfectly exposed in the camera, but the paper print coming out of the machine can be under or over-exposed by several f/stops. Automatic printing machines, such as used by 1-hour mini-labs, have manual over-ride capability – which works much like the exposure compensation control on your camera.  If your are confident that you’ve exposed your portrait negatives fairly accurately, and the subject’s faces are too light or dark in the final prints, you can point this out to the lab operator and they should reprint them with manual exposure compensation at no charge.   Pro labs don’t use averaging exposure meters for determining print paper exposure times.  Instead, they video analize each negative. This means a trained technician, a human being, views each negative on a large color monitor and determines what the main subject is.  If it is a portrait subject, he tweaks the print paper exposure time (and color balance) to render the best skin tones – and lets the other brightness values in the scene fall where they may. The main reason portraits shot in a professional studio normally look way more impressive than what the typical amateur can produce is because of the lab processing.  I am a studio owner, and I’m confident I would be out of business in 1 week if I used a consumer oriented processing lab.  The pro lab I use charges 65 cents per 4 X 5 proof print, which is typical.

Response:

If your shots are over-exposed, it is because your in-camera light meter is reading too much of the black background area behind your subject and assuming it is neutral grey with an average (18%) reflectance value.  Black reflects only 5 or 10 % of the light falling on it, so the light meter will erroneously add 1 or 2 f/stops more exposure to provide negative density which equals 18% gray.  In summary, your over-exposed results indicate you are metering too much background and not enough subject.

<<Much good info snipped Thanks Gene, I printed and saved your response as I think it is quite valuable.  I have been personally critical of your views on computers (heck, I am a computer professor!!) but this is valuable and it is obvious you know your photography stuff.  Thanks again. David Olsen Associate Professor Information Systems

Response:

No, it’s what they don’t do that matters.  Gene’s reply explains it well. The shadow area gets averaged out.  The difference is usally subtle anyway Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I had a similar problem.  It appeared that ratio control with my 550EX’s wasn’t working.  Turned out the lab’s equpment was compensating for the shadow areas that were supposed to be there. Do they do that for specific areas of the print then? It’s always appeared to me that the compensation has just been applied to the overall print exposure. Pat — Photos at http://www.pchaney.demon.co.uk/

Response:

I’ve used a pro lab for the initial processing but it took a couple of weeks to get the proofs back.  I decided to use Kodak for processing and 4×6’s and the pro lab for enlargements. Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – When the negative is fed through the film gate of the printing machine, an automatic exposure meter reading of that negative is taken.  This is much like an in-camera light meter which takes an average reading of a scene you are photographing.  If the negative contains large areas that are lighter or darker than average, this will falsely bias the print paper exposure time toward over or under exposure. Studio portraits often have a background that is deliberately lighter or darker than average – often pure white or pure black.  And the background may occupy a larger surface area on the negative than the subject’s face – thus biasing the average.  Consequently, your negative could have been perfectly exposed in the camera, but the paper print coming out of the machine can be under or over-exposed by several f/stops. Automatic printing machines, such as used by 1-hour mini-labs, have manual over-ride capability – which works much like the exposure compensation control on your camera.  If your are confident that you’ve exposed your portrait negatives fairly accurately, and the subject’s faces are too light or dark in the final prints, you can point this out to the lab operator and they should reprint them with manual exposure compensation at no charge. Pro labs don’t use averaging exposure meters for determining print paper exposure times.  Instead, they video analize each negative. This means a trained technician, a human being, views each negative on a large color monitor and determines what the main subject is.  If it is a portrait subject, he tweaks the print paper exposure time (and color balance) to render the best skin tones – and lets the other brightness values in the scene fall where they may. The main reason portraits shot in a professional studio normally look way more impressive than what the typical amateur can produce is because of the lab processing.  I am a studio owner, and I’m confident I would be out of business in 1 week if I used a consumer oriented processing lab.  The pro lab I use charges 65 cents per 4 X 5 proof print, which is typical.

Response:

I can’t see much difference between a backlight and a kicker light from this description. Could you explain please?

A backlight is normally positioned directly behind the subject, and is firing forward toward the back side of the subject.  It is positioned between the subject and the backdrop, and is blocked from view by the camera by the subject’s body.  If you send me an E-mail requesting it, I’ll send a .jpeg file illustrating the effect of backlighting. Kicker lights, also known as accent lights, are normally positioned to the rear of the subject’s position – but not directly behind the subject.  They are off to one side, and the light strikes the subject at an angle.  For example, you may have your subject posed in front of a solid black background.  Since you want the background to be black, use of a background light would defeat your intentions.  But your subject may have black hair and be wearing a dark colored shirt.  In this case, the subject’s face may appear to be floating in a sea of blackness.  The subject’s black hair will blend into the black background, and can’t be distinguished from it. In this example, you could position a kicker light high and to one side behind the subject.  The light would descend on the subject from a rearward angle, which separates the subject from the background. Care must be taken so that this light does not fall on the subject’s face.  A hair light is intended to simply create a bright spot on the subject’s hair, which also separates the subject’s head from the background.  But a kicker light, as I’ve explained it here, is intended to light the entire subject from the rear and one side.  If you want, you can position a hair light on one side of the subject – and a kicker light on the other side.  The kicker light may be 1 f/stop less bright than the main light, and the hair light may be 1 f/stop brighter than the main light. But how would using ND gel differ from using ratio control on the 550EXs?

As I understand it, the ratio control enables you to make the secondary flash more or less bright than the main flash by a specific amount.  But the ratio control used with the 550EXs does not take into account the flash to subject distance, and thus can’t know how much light is falling on the subject – shadow side versus highlight side of the subject’s face.  However, if you keep both flash units an equal distance from the subject, and you use the same kind of softboxes on both flash units, the system should give predictable results. Using an in-camera light meter can not give accurate results in auto exposure modes, because it does not take reflectance values into account.  Reflected light meters are calibrated with the assumption that the objected they are metering has an average reflectance value, which is 18% reflectance.  Caucasion skin has a reflectance value, typically, of 35%.  Consequently, if you take a meter reading off of the subject’s face and then use that reading to expose the film – the negative will be underexposed by 1 f/stop.  The faces of light or dark skinned people don’t have the same reflectance values, and you can’t know how much exposure compensation to dial into your camera unless these reflectance values are known and valued in relation to the 18% average. An incident light meter completely bypasses the issue of subject reflectance, and measures the light falling onto the scene – instead of the light being reflected from the scene.  Consequently, it provides more reliable and useable exposure readings – without any need to compensate for subjects that are lighter or darker than average. In professional studio portraiture, the metering technique is accomplished like this: 1.  First, determine what lens aperture you want to shoot at.  This will depend on what focal length of lens you are using, how much depth of field you need to keep all of the subject in focus, and how sharply focused you want to render the background.  For purposes of illustration, let’s say you want to shoot at f/8 – which is typical. 2.  Next, position your main light to achieve the highlight and shadow effects that you want.  Typically, 30 to 45 degrees away from the camera to subject axis is a good starting point.  Elevate the main light so it is higher than the subject’s head, and the light is falling on the subject from a downward angle. From the portrait subject’s position, aim the translucent dome of the incident flash meter directly toward the main light.  Fire the flash, and see what exposure reading you get.  Then, increase or decrease the power of the flash and take repeated meter readings until you get the brightness level you want.  If you want to use a lens aperture of f/8, you can make the brightness of the main light f/8.   3.  Next, position the fill light somewhere near the camera to subject axis.  Decide how much less bright than the main light you want the fill light to be.  For example, you may want the fill light to be 2 f/stops less bright than the main light, so the exposure value should be f/4.  Turn off the main light so it can’t influence your meter reading for the fill light.  From the portrait subject’s position, aim the dome of the flash meter directly toward the fill light.  Fire the fill light flash unit, and read the exposure value on the meter. Adjust the power level of the fill light flash until you get a meter reading of f/4. 4.  Any other lights you may have in your lighting arrangement are metered in the same way.  The brightness of each light must be metered and adjusted one at a time, and independent of the others. If you have a hair light, it’s brightness must be based on the reflectance of the subject’s hair.  But typically, you can make it 1 f/stop brighter than the main light.  In this example, it should be f/11.  To take the meter reading, you sit in the subject’s position and lay the flash meter on top of your head with the dome pointed toward the hair light. 5.  Finally, the issue of film exposure and negative density.  Slide film is more tolerant of underexposure than overexposure, so we use the principle "expose for the highlights, and let the shadows fall where they may.  You don’t want the detail to be burned out of the highlights on your subject.  So if you are shooting slide film, set the lens aperture to the same exposure value as your main light – f/8 in this example. The opposite of slide film, negatives are more tolerant of overexposure than under exposure.  Underexposure causes you to lose detail in the shadow areas – for example if your subject is wearing a black or dark shirt.  So the rule of thumb with negative film is "expose for the shadows, and let the highlights fall where they may. With negative film, you can usually set the lens aperture for the same exposure value as the main light and get satisfactory results.  But if your fill light is 2 or more f/stops less bright than the main light, you can get better shadow detail by giving the film more exposure.  So you set the lens aperture to a value that is half-way between the the main light at f/8 and the fill light at f/4 – which would be f/5.6 in this case.  If you want to shoot at f/8 for depth of field reasons, you would need to make the brightness of the main light f/11 and the fill light f/5.6 This is the standard technique used by studio professionals, and will give perfect results every time – which is what the clients expect. If you think you can accomplish the same thing with TTL flash metering equipment – good luck.   Shutterbug is a good magazine, if you read the advertisements and ignore the camera reviews.  Shutterbug always has an advertisement by Photographer’s Warehouse, who sells low cost studio lighting equipment.  They have a Model PG3001MLB studio monolight, which sells for $120.  This has about the same maximum brightness output as a Canon 550EX, which is ample for a home studio.  It is AC powered, so you don’t have to worry about batteries – and it recycles to full power in about 3 seconds.  It has a modeling light, a bracket for mounting it to a light stand and holding an umbrella, and a built-in optical slave.  It’s brightness is adjustable over a 3 f/stop range. It has a number of low-cost accessories available, such as grids, a snoot, gel holder, and several sizes of softboxes.  The point is, this is way more useful, versatile and convenient to use for portraiture than the 550EX – and it costs way less. If you want to get professional results, you have to use the equipment and techniques that professionals use.  For portraiture,  in-camera metering and TTL flash ain’t it.  The professional way is less expensive and easier to use than the stuff you’ve got.  Of course, magazine equipment reviews for the 550EX (and the EOS 3) are not going to tell you that.  They capitalize on what you don’t know, in oder to sell you a product you wouldn’t want if you did know.    

Response:

Question:

Hello, Have you something reported on NEWPORT a firm based in portugal and in Belgium or on REGENCY CONSULTING a company based in Germany. I will appreciate if you have any kind of information about us Thank you – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thanks for the excellent summary. I wonder if there is any person reading this news group who can verify that they have actually participated in a "prime bank" or some such other so called, "high yield" program. Anyone want to tell us about it? – Steve Avoiding Investment Scams The last several years, I have seen an increasing number of people defrauded by investment scams, probably made easier because of all the money everyone is making in the stock market. But before making any investment, you should ask the following 10 questions: 1. Is the investment audited by one of the major international accounting firms? Real investments are audited by one of the large international accounting firms; indeed, a real investment will hold this out as a selling point. On the other hand, a scam investment will not be audited by anyone, or by a small firm nobody has heard of (and may in fact be a sham). 2. Is the investment registered with your state securities commission or with the SEC? Real investments must be registered with your state securities commission, or with the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission. This is true of offshore investments which are marketed to you in your state — they must be registered as well, and avoid anyone who says they are "exempt" because they are offshore. Avoid unregistered investments. 3. Is the investment listed in the Wall Street Journal, London Financial Times, or similar well-known financial publication? Real investments will be listed in a major financial publication, or findable in some other major financial resource. You typically can’t find scam investments in these publications. Beware "CUSIP" numbers as an "authentication" of the investment — anyone can get a CUSIP number for just about anything so this doesn’t help you. 4. Is everything about the investment out in the open? Real investments are completely "transparent", meaning that you can clearly see and understand each and every step of where your dollars go and how they grow. Scams hide or obfuscate one or more parts of the plan, speak in terms of secrecy, may allude to a "secret banking system" or similar nonsense, and might even require you to sign a secrecy or confidentiality agreement prior to seeing the plan (it will almost always be a scam if you have to sign such a document). 5. Are you allowed to seek independent legal counsel prior to making the investment? Real investments will encourage you to seek independent legal and financial advice prior to making the investment. Scam investments will give you bizarre reasons why you shouldn’t talk to someone, such as "CPAs are trained not to speak of this!", and they may even require you to sign a secrecy or confidentiality agreement which will discourage you from consulting anyone before making your investment. 6. Is the seller licensed with your state securities commission or with the NASD? Real investments are sold by licensed stockbrokers who are registered both with your state security commission and with the National Association of Securities Dealers. Scam investments are sold by scam artists who are not registered with anyone, or perhaps with some phony-baloney foreign stock exchange (or more recently, "cyber-exchange"). 7. Does the promoter have a good background? A real promoter will be "clean" and you can verify this by hiring a private investigation firm to conduct a basic investigation. A scam artist will often be using an alias, and will often have a criminal background (though not always). 8. Does the investment "make sense"? Avoid all unregistered investments which are "guaranteed" as this is a sure sign of a scam (if the guarantee would be real, it would be registered). Avoid investments which make representations which are unusually high, i.e., funds and programs which promise to pay more than 50% per year, or promissory notes and CDs which promise to pay more than 10% per year. 9. What does law enforcement say about this investment? Don’t hesitate to call law enforcement, such as your state security commissioner or attorney general, before you invest. A real promoter will have nothing to fear if investigated (and can probably clear it up with a phone call). This is just a part of doing business for them. On the other hand, a scam artist probably will not stand up to this scrutiny. 10. Is it too good to be true? If you have to ask yourself this question, it probably is. While these questions will not keep you from being scammed in every case (some scam artists are really sharp!), they will probably help you see the truth 9 times out of 10. Truth is, if you have lingering fears you are probably better off putting your money into a nice, relatively safe investment which just tracks the market, such as the Vanguard 500 mutual fund or similar "no-load" index fund. Private Placements: So-called Private Placements are an investment which can in some states in some very limited circumstances, be sold without registration with your state securities commission. Many (perhaps most) of these are scams, and even the legitimate ones are so risky that they are unsuitable for most people, and so you should probably just avoid them. Never, ever invest in a private placement without first consulting a qualified, independent attorney and having him do some investigation. Private placements are really only suitable for people who have a great deal of wealth, and who can "gamble" a very small portion of their wealth on a particular project. But that’s exactly what it is, a gamble, and so don’t make the investment unless you can stand to lose every penny of what you invest.

Question:

150 for the exam in oregon, that varies with the state.  My review course (Conviser Duffy) was $1050, but I was able to use a coupon I won through a school function and also get a student discount.  Good luck. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Does anyone know how much it costs to take the CPA Exam and any review courses?  Thanks Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.

Response:

Does anyone know how much it costs to take the CPA Exam and any review courses?

Well, there is talk that if the CPA exam is computerized it may cost about $500 and will be initially offered 4 times a year. — Robert J. Romano, CPA Arlington, Massachusetts (781) 648-4966 http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/rjromano

Response:

Well, there is talk that if the CPA exam is computerized it may cost about $500 and will be initially offered 4 times a year.

The new CPA exam being proposed is an interesting exercise. Reportedly the system being developed is being tested to be an excellent predictor of who would ultimately pass the current full blown exam, but to be able to do so in a relatively short period of time.  In theory, candidates would still have to be just as prepared, but the "answer" would come much quicker (an awful lot quicker for those that aren’t at all prepared <grin). — Ed Zollars, CPA (AZ) http://www.getnet.com/~hmtzcpas

Response:

Edward Zollars responded… Well, there is talk that if the CPA exam is computerized it may cost about $500 and will be initially offered 4 times a year. The new CPA exam being proposed is an interesting exercise. Reportedly the system being developed is being tested to be an excellent predictor of who would ultimately pass the current full blown exam, but to be able to do so in a relatively short period of time.

Has anyone here taken the new computerized GMAT as well as the old pencil-and-paper version?  How do they compare? From what I understand, the GMAT now selects questions based on how well the test-taker does on previous questions, so that scores can more accurately reflect the ability level of the person taking the exam.  I believe this structure was designed to quickly and efficiently move into the type of questions appropriate for each bracket of score levels.  I don’t know if the exam takes any less time now. A computerized CPA exam makes sense in the age of spreadsheets; when was the last time you got out a pencil and green ledger paper? Would the "no-calculator" rule still be in effect?  I liked that one; it favored test-takers who were actually good at math (a surprisingly under-rated skill among accountants, IMO).

Response:

Question:

Go to an airport where Signature doesn’t have any competition, like Miami or Newark. Even when you show up in a 10 million dollar jet, they can’t be bothered to get you turned around in good time. They will screw up the fuel order if you don’t watch them, if they remember to come and do your fueling. You have to get your own ice because it will be melted by the time they get it to the plane. At most major FBO’s, you shut down in front of the FBO’s entrance, disembark your pax, and the linemen tow the plane to parking afterwards.

I certainly agree that Signature operations vary greatly in the level of services that one receives.  It can range anywhere from totally satisfying to "I’m gonna go sleep in the plane…..".  For the fees that they charge, their level of service could be much, much better and much more consistent.   I have been to many FBO’s that had magnificent facilities, services, personnel, crew cars, maintenance, customer service, etc. that do not charge nearly what Signature charges at most places. My most recent raving has been with the service that I received at Signal Aviation in Lebanon, NH the other day.  We had arrived in a business jet with one passenger who was going to attend a short meeting, and we were to return him back to Chicago.  Of course, we were immediately flagged in by a crew of two and were chocked and red carpeted before we could get the door open.  If we would have been any closer to the front door, we’d have tore the side of the building off.  Our total ground time was no more than 1 hour, and in that time, we got refueled, a mechanic was summoned to service our oxygen (this was after normal business hours on a Friday night — mechanic interrupted his dinner at home to come to the airport), we were coffeed and iced promptly, we were given a brand new MERCEDES BENZ courtesy car, complete with cell phone to go have dinner (and this was the normal courtesy car — they have two Benz’s in fact), and we were treated to a spotless FBO building.  Upon departure, each of us crewmembers were given a small token gift of local products including a nice jug of maple syrup and fresh coffee beans.  The maple syrup is the best I’ve ever had, and I have yet to get the coffee beans ground. The small fee that was paid for their services was miniscule compared to the level of services rendered.  Operations like this are an absolute pleasure to visit.  Now granted, we dropped several grand at this establishment (gas, O2, and landing fees) during our one hour stopover, but we’d have dropped at least that much at a comparable Signature FSO and would not have received nearly that level of personal service. If any of the readers of this newsgroup happen to be in the New Hampshire area, Signal Aviation at LEB comes with my highest recommendation. I don’t really need a large, well-equipped operation. I need speed of service.

I agree to an extent, but, and I’m sure you’ll agree as well….level of service and value of said services is equally as important as speed of service. — Blue Skies, Ryan R. Healy, ATP/MEII http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/rhealy707

Response:

The two Signature’s you visited have good competition on the field. This helps keep them in line. And you gave them 2 days to complete the service. I will point out that Signature Savanah lists their hours in AOPA’s directory as being open 24 hours monday through friday. They sure as hell were NOT open the night I needed fuel to deliver some time critical components. There wasn’t even a number for call-out. I won’t use them in the future. Go to an airport where Signature doesn’t have any competition, like Miami or Newark. Even when you show up in a 10 million dollar jet, they can’t be bothered to get you turned around in good time. They will screw up the fuel order if you don’t watch them, if they remember to come and do your fueling. You have to get your own ice because it will be melted by the time they get it to the plane. At most major FBO’s, you shut down in front of the FBO’s entrance, disembark your pax, and the linemen tow the plane to parking afterwards. At these Signature’s, you shutdown in a distant corner of the ramp and your passengers fend off the rain and snow as they hike to the FBO. More than once, I have waited an hour and sometimes longer for a GPU. One time, I gave up and got it myself. If I counted on Signature’s service to impress my pax (who pay the bills), I would end up in the unemployment line. And then there are the fees they charge for this ‘great’ service. As I wrote in an earlier post, they are exorbitant. I don’t really need a large, well-equipped operation. I need speed of service. I have been turned in 15 minutes at FBO’s that were slightly more than shacks. I tipped the linemen $100 and still paid less than Signature would have charged. The pax that bought the multi-million dollar plane paid to go fast, not wait in a fancy building. D.

Response:

Fortunately, there are numerous satellite airports in the Miami area that don’t have landing fees and they don’t have Signature. D.

Response:

I’ve often wondered what legal precedence there was to charge a landing fee.

What legal precidence is there to a parking lot charging to park your car, or a highway charging a toll to drive the road?  It’s pretty much the same thing. If you left without paying, could you be charged with theft of service?

Possibly. Could you be billed?

It’s fairly common practice to record your tail number and send you a bill at some airports.  Why they bother for $5 is beyond me, but they do. Where in the FAR’s does it actually call for enforcement action based on not paying a landing fee?

Nowhere that I know of.  It doesn’t have to.  This is outside of the scope of the FARs.  Where does it say that if you tell the FBO to fill your gas tanks, you are obligated to pay for it?

Response:

CGX (Chicago Meigs) – Class Delta, $12.00 Landing Fee + $9.00 Service Fee

Don’t forget the $9 parking fee that is assessed if you stay longer than 4 ours. —                                 William LeFebvre                                 Group sys Consulting                                 +1 770 813 3224

Response:

: I’ve often wondered what legal precedence there was to charge a landing : fee. : What legal precidence is there to a parking lot charging to park your car, : or a highway charging a toll to drive the road?  It’s pretty much the same : thing. "yes, but" it is clear from reading this thread that the posting, knowledge of, and enforcement of landing fees is quite haphazard.  when i get on the turnpike, it is spelled out right there what i will pay and by golly unless i take a shortcut through a swamp somewhere i will pay it.  i am no lawyer (amen, amen, alleleujia), but a lawyer friend of mine (may i burn in hell forever) says that if you landed and were suddenly slapped with a hefty landing fee, if the fee were not sufficiently obviously posted, you probably have a good case for not paying it.   now what ’sufficiently obviously’ means is open for interpretation–but based on what we have seen so far, id say it would at least be worth looking into.  i am also not advocating anybody conscientiously break the law/FAR, of course. – adrian

Response:

a lawyer friend of mine (may i burn in hell forever) says that if you landed and were suddenly slapped with a hefty landing fee, if the fee were not sufficiently obviously posted, you probably have a good case for not paying it.

It is obviously posted.  Every airport with a landing fee (that I know of) has such documented in the A/FD.  There really is no excuse for not knowing about it.  It’s up to you to call ahead and find out the details. Some are unexpectedly high.  Most people would expect to pay an arm and a leg for landing at LaGuardia or Logan, and they wouldn’t be disappointed. But Montaulk NY, for example is a small uncontrolled stip out near the tip of Long Island.  Most people would probably expect it to be free, but they charge something like $15 for a single, more if you stay overnight. They accept no federal money.  The landing fees are their entire means of support.  The A/FD listing plainly says there is a landing fee, and gives the phone number of the airport manager.  When I called to enquire, they were friendly, but up-front about what it cost.  Had I failed to enquired beforehand, it would have been nobody’s fault but my own that I didn’t know the fee. What would your lawyer friend say about walking into a restaurant and ordering the lobster, which is marked on the menu as "market price" and then refusing to pay for it because when you got the bill it was higher than you expected but you never bothered to ask what it was when you ordered it?

Response:

CGX (Chicago Meigs) – Class Delta, $12.00 Landing Fee + $9.00 Service Fee Don’t forget the $9 parking fee that is assessed if you stay longer than 4 ours.

Yup!  And $25.00 for overnight parking.  No monthly tie-down available at all, which is kind of a bummer for those of us who live in the neighborhood and would like to be able to walk to our planes. jean. Jean Liddle                   | DISCLAIMER:  "It is unlikely that email:  jean kcco dot com     | anyone shares the opinions expressed http://jean.nu/               | here, much less my employer." Dual:  33.7 hours  PIC:   8.6 hours

Response:

That depends on the airport. Some of the airports in the NY area are known for their landing fee Nazis (Teterboro, Farmingdale, and Islip). They have people writing down N numbers or chasing you in a truck when you land.

They run you down with a truck at Trenton, even!  (Or did when I was a student, anyway.)  What a waste of time and resources for a measly $3… I was amused to call Teterboro, though, to ask about landing fees, only to have them ask for my registration number.  Turns out it’s weight-based, and when I said "N44438" he said "oh, ok, a Cherokee, 2300 pounds, $5.50."  (Or whatever it actually was…)  Teterboro’s probably the best of the lot, fee-wise, unless you’re flying something really heavy.  Park at Atlantic if you’re headed into NYC, they’re right by the bus. good luck, andrew

Response:

Anyplace one can get a list of all airports that have Signature *service* so us GA low-lifes can avoid them like the plague? Ron : Premium at MIA for piston twin is $28. Add an outrageous $140 service fee : for the sole FBO, Signature. Signature then charges you $3.08/gal for avgas : from monday to friday. : : D. :

Response:

Anyplace one can get a list of all airports that have Signature *service* so us GA low-lifes can avoid them like the plague?

AOPA’s Aviation Directory lists FBOs for each field.  If Signature is the only one listed, then you probably want to avoid it.  :- —                                 William LeFebvre                                 Group sys Consulting                                 +1 770 813 3224

Response:

Someone at work asked me how much landing fees were at the large airports. After naming two nearby, JFK and HFD, I explained one was class B and the other class C. But having never landed at either I had no idea what the landing fees would be. Anyone care to quote fees paid at various fields??? MDW (Chicago Midway) – Class Charlie, $7.00 Landing Fee CGX (Chicago Meigs) – Class Delta, $12.00 Landing Fee + $9.00 Service Fee The only two in this area that have charged me have been MDW and CGX. I assume ORD (Chicago O’Hare) charges something but I have no idea what.

JFK is $25 after 10:00 PM about $109 befor 10:00 PM plus you need a reservation befor 8:00 PM. You also get 1 hour at the terminal free. These prices are based on weight and are what I paid about 2 months ago for a Piper Archer. I never went to LGA, but I did find out that the landing fee is never cheap, I cant remember the numbers off hand but I’m sure it was over $100.00 all day. JFK is actually a good deal. For some good info on airports visit. http://www.airnav.com/ Sometimes they have the langing fees. They do for JFK. — /            John Roncallo              /

Response:

Anyplace one can get a list of all airports that have Signature *service* so us GA low-lifes can avoid them like the plague? AOPA’s Aviation Directory lists FBOs for each field.  If Signature is the only one listed, then you probably want to avoid it.  :-

I have read coments like this before about Signature, and when travelling south of the border earlier in the year, I was concerned when at Savannah we ended up at Signature. What I found there was a large, well equipped operation with comfortable  lounges, weather computer terminal, courtesy cars and helpful staff. We subsequently (after two days in Savannah) stopped at Signature in Charlotte and experienced basically the same thing (we didn’t get the red carpets that the jets got but..). So my question is what’s wrong with Signature? Terry

Response:

Someone at work asked me how much landing fees were at the large airports. After naming two nearby, JFK and HFD, I explained one was class B and the other class C. But having never landed at either I had no idea what the landing fees would be. Anyone care to quote fees paid at various fields???

On a related topic, what are the logistics of collecting/paying the fee? Do you actually go somewhere on the field, get billed by N-number, something else? —Jim

Response:

Premium at MIA for piston twin is $28. Add an outrageous $140 service fee for the sole FBO, Signature. Signature then charges you $3.08/gal for avgas from monday to friday.

WOW!!! or should I say OUCH!!! By "Premium" I’d guess you’re talking landing fee? And what if you don’t want to be "Serviced"??? Even just to park long enough to drop off or pick someone up? And I thought things were expensive up here in the Northeast… Charles N137AT

Response:

writes: Providence (PVD) supposedly charges a landing fee, but I don’t know if they enforce it for small planes.

They do, unless you buy fuel. At least they did the last time I was there. Which was over two years ago. Charles N137AT

Response:

That depends on the airport. Some of the airports in the NY area are known for their landing fee Nazis (Teterboro, Farmingdale, and Islip).

I didn’t realize Islip had a landing fee, but TEB and FRG certainly do. And sure enough, if I land there, a few months later my flying club will get a bill for it and pass it along to me.  I figure for the $5 landing fee, they probably spend a good $25 in accounting paperwork to collect it.

Response:

Someone at work asked me how much landing fees were at the large airports. After naming two nearby, JFK and HFD, I explained one was class B and the other class C. But having never landed at either I had no idea what the landing fees would be. Anyone care to quote fees paid at various fields???

I believe DFW charges something on the order of $25-$35 for Part 91 aircraft. I’ve often wondered what legal precedence there was to charge a landing fee.  If you left without paying, could you be charged with theft of service?  Could you be billed?  Where in the FAR’s does it actually call for enforcement action based on not paying a landing fee?   –Brian

Response:

Someone at work asked me how much landing fees were at the large airports. After naming two nearby, JFK and HFD, I explained one was class B and the other class C. But having never landed at either I had no idea what the landing fees would be. Anyone care to quote fees paid at various fields??? On a related topic, what are the logistics of collecting/paying the fee? Do you actually go somewhere on the field, get billed by N-number, something else?

That depends on the airport. Some of the airports in the NY area are known for their landing fee Nazis (Teterboro, Farmingdale, and Islip). They have people writing down N numbers or chasing you in a truck when you land. At Northeast Philadelphia you only paid the landing fee if you went into the FBO or got gas. If you needed a bathroom break then you get hit. If you don’t walk into an FBO the you are not their problem. Some airports take down the N number of the landing aircraft then send a bill to the registered owner of the aircraft. John – N8086N YOUR JOB IS AT STAKE! Write your congressman and senators to oppose the "American Competitiveness Act". EMail Address: |c.o.l.o.s.s.e.u.m.b.u.i.l.d.e.r.s.| |c.o.m.|

Response:

Neither HFD (Hartford-Brainard, which is Class D), nor Bradley Field (BDL, Class C) charges a landing fee for light aircraft operating under FAR Part 91 (non-commercial).  Providence (PVD) supposedly charges a landing fee, but I don’t know if they enforce it for small planes.

All airports in Rhode Island charge a $5 landing fee, which is waived if you buy fuel. That’s according to a sign in the Block Island FBO. There, the State maintains a desk at which you pay the fee, and you have to go through there to get off the field. George Patterson,  N3162Q.

Response:

Neither HFD (Hartford-Brainard, which is Class D), nor Bradley Field (BDL, Class C) charges a landing fee for light aircraft operating under FAR Part 91 (non-commercial).  Providence (PVD) supposedly charges a landing fee, but I don’t know if they enforce it for small planes. Jeff Oslick

Response:

Someone at work asked me how much landing fees were at the large airports. After naming two nearby, JFK and HFD, I explained one was class B and the other class C. But having never landed at either I had no idea what the landing fees would be. Anyone care to quote fees paid at various fields???

MDW (Chicago Midway) – Class Charlie, $7.00 Landing Fee CGX (Chicago Meigs) – Class Delta, $12.00 Landing Fee + $9.00 Service Fee The only two in this area that have charged me have been MDW and CGX. I assume ORD (Chicago O’Hare) charges something but I have no idea what. jean. Jean Liddle                   | DISCLAIMER:  "It is unlikely that email:  jean kcco dot com     | anyone shares the opinions expressed http://jean.nu/               | here, much less my employer." Dual:  33.7 hours  PIC:   8.6 hours

Response:

Premium at MIA for piston twin is $28. Add an outrageous $140 service fee for the sole FBO, Signature. Signature then charges you $3.08/gal for avgas from monday to friday. D.

Response:

Someone at work asked me how much landing fees were at the large airports. After naming two nearby, JFK and HFD, I explained one was class B and the other class C. But having never landed at either I had no idea what the landing fees would be. Anyone care to quote fees paid at various fields??? MDW (Chicago Midway) – Class Charlie, $7.00 Landing Fee CGX (Chicago Meigs) – Class Delta, $12.00 Landing Fee + $9.00 Service Fee The only two in this area that have charged me have been MDW and CGX. I assume ORD (Chicago O’Hare) charges something but I have no idea what.

I flew into O’Hare my first (and only) time in 1993 (or was it 1994).  Right smack in the middle of a weekday. I was flying a 182.  As I recall, it cost somewhere around $70 all told. greg — greg travis                     "The coffee shop piano plays toe-tapping jazz, http://www.prime-mover.org/             — Microsoft, in "The Future is Today"

Response:

Someone at work asked me how much landing fees were at the large airports. After naming two nearby, JFK and HFD, I explained one was class B and the other class C. But having never landed at either I had no idea what the landing fees would be. Anyone care to quote fees paid at various fields??? Thanks Charlie N137AT

Response:

Question:

Thanks for a very interesting post on the Ercoupe.  I am in the market for an Ercoupe or a Grumman AA1A and currently leaning on the former. Both great planes. But two entirely different experiences. The Grumman is much more like a sports car. Definitely get checked out by a Grumman-familiar instructor if you go with the AA1. The American Yankee Association (Grumman owner’s group) has PFP (Pilot Familiarization Program) people around the country. Check the Grumman web site at                 http://www.gray.mb.ca/gray/grumman

While we are on the subject of Grummans, I’d like to put in a plug for a fly-in for same being held in April (If this is not the correct forum to do so, please let me know).  The site is the Hattiesburg, MS, USA municipal airport, with a 6000′ x 150′ runway used almost exclusively for general aviation.  The date is Sat., April 12, with a rain date as April 19.     For more information, contact the American Yankee Association or e-mail me directly for the host’s address (he flies an AA1A, which I’ve flown briefly from the right-hand seat). Allen Johnson

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can anyone provide data regarding flight performance for the Forney/Alon Ercoupe. Info regarding field / cruise / climb performance would be greatly appreciated. Also any info regards operation of type i.e. corrosion problems, prefferrred models etc.            Forney F1       Alon A2         Mooney M10            Aircoupe        Aircoupe        Cadet Production  1957-60         1965-68         1969-70 Engine              Continental     Continental     Continental            C90-12F         C90-16F         C90-??? Horsepower  90              90              90 TBO         1,800hrs        1,800hrs        1,800hrs Max Speed   130mph          128mph          118mph Cruise Speed        120mph          124mph          110mph Stall Speed 56mph           56mph           46mph Fuel Capacity       24g             24g             24g Rate of Climb       600fpm          640fpm          835fpm T/O – 50ft  2,100ft         2,100ft         1,953ft T/O – Ground        500ft           540ft           534ft Land – 50ft 1,750ft         1,750ft         1,015ft Land – Ground       600ft           650ft           431ft Gross Weight        1,400lbs        1,450lbs        1,450lbs Empty Weight        890lbs          930lbs          950lbs An Alon A2 with spring steel gear is the best of all I have appended to the bottom of this message a copy of some data which I previously presented to a Grumman listserve when someone asked about Ercoupes/Aircoupes. Hope it is of interest! Michael. Grumman AA5A Cheetah C-GRCC Alon A2 Aircoupe C-FXVI Michael Gillespie                                   |  Voice/Fax 204.943.9000 —– No good deed will go unpunished. ——- Standard Disclaimers Apply — ERCO is "Engineering Research Corporation" whose first product was the "Coupe", called the ERcoupe. This was the first tricycle aircraft and was designed by Fred Weick. Fred is famous for many things, including the "takeoff/landing over a 50-foot obstacle" specification. He went on to design the Cherokee. The first JATO (Jet Assisted Take Off) was an Ercoupe, which test led to the foundation of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The Ercoupe, with its distinctive twin-tail design, was originally provided with "coordinated controls", ie. the rudder was connected to the yoke and yaw correction was automatic – NO RUDDER PEDALS. The steerable nose wheel was connected directly to the yoke – you taxied exactly like you drive your car. This, and limited elevator travel, contributed to the result that the ‘Coupe is "characteristicly incapable of spinning"! You can try, but the plane will fly out of an incipient spin. An entirely new catagory of pilot license was created for the thousands of new pilots who had never seen a rudder pedal. This plane was designed pre WW2 and didn’t get into real production till 1945 when thousands were sold through such esteemed aviation outlets as the Men’s Department at Macy’s!! "Rudder Kits" were available to convert the plane from 2-control ("coordinated") to 3-control ("conventional").   Landing a 2-control ‘Coupe is an "interesting" experience!! You crab it into the wind and land that way!! The nose wheel will caster and straighten it out ON THE RUNWAY. Another historical fact: all original Boeing 707 pilots were taught to land in the ‘Coupe – the 707 had a similar problem – the low hanging engines meant that you couldn’t drop a wing into a crosswind – you had to land them crabbed!! The plane was built by a series of manufacturers:  Company           Model           Years     Production  ERCO/Sanders              415C-415H       1940-41         112                                    1945-52       5,028  Forney            F1              1956-60         157  Air Products              F1A             1960-62          25  Alon                      A2 Aircoupe     1964-67         245  Mooney            A2A Aircoupe    1967-68          21                    A2A Cadet       1968             38                    M10 Cadet       1969-70          59                                    Total         5,685 Mooney built the last 59 with a "Mooney tail" instead of the distinctive twin tail of all previous production. This, and other changes, created an airplane which could stall and spin with the best but also lost a lot of performance. It was their intention that the M10 Cadet be their "trainer". "Alon" was an interesting bit of history: While Forney was building the ‘Coupe, one company which came mighty close to buying the type certificate was Beech!! John Allen (Beech plant manager) and Lee Higdon (Beech accounting manager) felt strongly that Beech should take it on, but Olive Beech got cold feet and said no. So they quit and setup the Allen-Higdon (ALON) company to do it. They were so impressed with the plane that they bought the company!! Alon made a number of speed/power changes to the airplane and reverted to providing rudder pedals as standard, with the 2-control by special order only. They changed from vertically sliding window entry to a sliding canopy. Why do I know so much about ‘Coupes?? I learned to fly in a 1966 Alon A2A AirCoupe which I now own with my brother. I consider my Cheetah to be a 4-place ‘Coupe! Some people dump on ‘Coupes, much as they dump on "Grummans". Its unfair and ignorant criticism. But, as with the Grummans, it keeps the prices down and the secret in the family!! My brother, for instance, owns a Pitts S2B, a Pitts S1, a Taylorcraft and the ‘Coupe. He flies airshows in his Pitts and was a Canadian aerobatics champion. Which is his favourite plane?? The ‘Coupe!! If you ever have to opportunity to fly a ‘Coupe – try it!!

Many thanks for the info Michael. The reason for my interest is that I am possibly in the market for a Coupe here in UK. Many years ago I rode as passenger in a Coupe and greatly enjoyed the experience. I presently own an ultralight and am looking toward upgrade to a two seat light aircraft to operate under our UK PFA rules (similar I suppose to your experimental category). I operate from a 400mtr grass strip with no real obstructions on the approach/climb out and I am trying to establish whether the Coupe would cope o.k. (I suspect it will). Apologies for not responding sooner but the festive season has temporarily rearranged my priorities. Regards. Chris Maher. Incidentally, I should also like to wish you and your family the best for Christmas and the new Year. Chris Maher Leadrange Ltd

Response:

Thanks for a very interesting post on the Ercoupe.  I am in the market for an Ercoupe or a Grumman AA1A and currently leaning on the former.

Both great planes. But two entirely different experiences. The Grumman is much more like a sports car. Definitely get checked out by a Grumman-familiar instructor if you go with the AA1. The American Yankee Association (Grumman owner’s group) has PFP (Pilot Familiarization Program) people around the country. Check the Grumman web site at                 http://www.gray.mb.ca/gray/grumman Just a little older and a little slower. Fabric wings. Probably no rudder pedals as standard; maybe rudder pedal kit installed.  Vertically sliding side windows as opposed to retractable canopy. I’ve expanded the chart I made to include one model of the 415 series. The 415C was 65hp, the 415D was 75hp and the 415G was 85hp.                 ERCO 415D   Forney F1   Alon A2     Mooney M10                 Ercoupe     Aircoupe    Aircoupe    Cadet Production      1946-49     1957-60     1965-68     1969-70 Engine          Continental Continental Continental Continental                 C75-12F     C90-12F     C90-16F     C90-??? Horsepower      75          90          90          90 TBO             1,800hrs    1,800hrs    1,800hrs    1,800hrs Max Speed       125mph      130mph      128mph      118mph Cruise Speed    114mph      120mph      124mph      110mph Stall Speed     56mph       56mph       56mph       56mph Fuel Capacity   24g         24g         24g         24g Rate of Climb   550fpm      600fpm      640fpm      835fpm T/O – 50ft      2,250ft     2,100ft     2,100ft     1,953ft T/O – Ground    560ft       500ft       540ft       534ft Land – 50ft     1,750ft     1,750ft     1,750ft     1,015ft Land – Ground   350ft       600ft       650ft       431ft Gross Weight    1,400lbs    1,400lbs    1,450lbs    1,450lbs Empty Weight    815lbs      890lbs      930lbs      950lbs Also what is the operating cost for your Alon?

It burns about 5.5gal/hr. Otherwise its very inexpensive to maintain. Good parts supply from Univair and Skyport. Good owners club and "Coupe Capers" monthly publication.         Ercoupe Owners Club         PO Box 15388         Durham  NC  27704         (919) 471-9492 If you want to get a ‘Coupe, get a copy of "The Ercoupe" by Stanley Thomas. ISBN 0-8306-7016-5 TAB Books Div. McGraw-Hill. Michael. Grumman AA5A Cheetah C-GRCC Alon A2 Aircoupe C-FXVI Michael Gillespie                                   |  Voice/Fax 204.943.9000 —– No good deed will go unpunished. ——- Standard Disclaimers Apply —

Response:

Can anyone provide data regarding flight performance for the Forney/Alon Ercoupe. Info regarding field / cruise / climb performance would be greatly appreciated. Also any info regards operation of type i.e. corrosion problems, prefferrred models etc. Chris Maher. Chris Maher Leadrange Ltd

Response:

Can anyone provide data regarding flight performance for the Forney/Alon Ercoupe. Info regarding field / cruise / climb performance would be greatly appreciated. Also any info regards operation of type i.e. corrosion problems, prefferrred models etc.

                Forney F1       Alon A2         Mooney M10                 Aircoupe        Aircoupe        Cadet Production      1957-60         1965-68         1969-70 Engine          Continental     Continental     Continental                 C90-12F         C90-16F         C90-??? Horsepower      90              90              90 TBO             1,800hrs        1,800hrs        1,800hrs Max Speed       130mph          128mph          118mph Cruise Speed    120mph          124mph          110mph Stall Speed     56mph           56mph           46mph Fuel Capacity   24g             24g             24g Rate of Climb   600fpm          640fpm          835fpm T/O – 50ft      2,100ft         2,100ft         1,953ft T/O – Ground    500ft           540ft           534ft Land – 50ft     1,750ft         1,750ft         1,015ft Land – Ground   600ft           650ft           431ft Gross Weight    1,400lbs        1,450lbs        1,450lbs Empty Weight    890lbs          930lbs          950lbs An Alon A2 with spring steel gear is the best of all I have appended to the bottom of this message a copy of some data which I previously presented to a Grumman listserve when someone asked about Ercoupes/Aircoupes. Hope it is of interest! Michael. Grumman AA5A Cheetah C-GRCC Alon A2 Aircoupe C-FXVI Michael Gillespie                                   |  Voice/Fax 204.943.9000 —– No good deed will go unpunished. ——- Standard Disclaimers Apply — ERCO is "Engineering Research Corporation" whose first product was the "Coupe", called the ERcoupe. This was the first tricycle aircraft and was designed by Fred Weick. Fred is famous for many things, including the "takeoff/landing over a 50-foot obstacle" specification. He went on to design the Cherokee. The first JATO (Jet Assisted Take Off) was an Ercoupe, which test led to the foundation of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The Ercoupe, with its distinctive twin-tail design, was originally provided with "coordinated controls", ie. the rudder was connected to the yoke and yaw correction was automatic – NO RUDDER PEDALS. The steerable nose wheel was connected directly to the yoke – you taxied exactly like you drive your car. This, and limited elevator travel, contributed to the result that the ‘Coupe is "characteristicly incapable of spinning"! You can try, but the plane will fly out of an incipient spin. An entirely new catagory of pilot license was created for the thousands of new pilots who had never seen a rudder pedal. This plane was designed pre WW2 and didn’t get into real production till 1945 when thousands were sold through such esteemed aviation outlets as the Men’s Department at Macy’s!! "Rudder Kits" were available to convert the plane from 2-control ("coordinated") to 3-control ("conventional").   Landing a 2-control ‘Coupe is an "interesting" experience!! You crab it into the wind and land that way!! The nose wheel will caster and straighten it out ON THE RUNWAY. Another historical fact: all original Boeing 707 pilots were taught to land in the ‘Coupe – the 707 had a similar problem – the low hanging engines meant that you couldn’t drop a wing into a crosswind – you had to land them crabbed!! The plane was built by a series of manufacturers:   Company               Model           Years     Production   ERCO/Sanders          415C-415H       1940-41         112                                         1945-52       5,028   Forney                F1              1956-60         157   Air Products          F1A             1960-62          25   Alon                  A2 Aircoupe     1964-67         245   Mooney                A2A Aircoupe    1967-68          21                         A2A Cadet       1968             38                         M10 Cadet       1969-70          59                                         Total         5,685 Mooney built the last 59 with a "Mooney tail" instead of the distinctive twin tail of all previous production. This, and other changes, created an airplane which could stall and spin with the best but also lost a lot of performance. It was their intention that the M10 Cadet be their "trainer". "Alon" was an interesting bit of history: While Forney was building the ‘Coupe, one company which came mighty close to buying the type certificate was Beech!! John Allen (Beech plant manager) and Lee Higdon (Beech accounting manager) felt strongly that Beech should take it on, but Olive Beech got cold feet and said no. So they quit and setup the Allen-Higdon (ALON) company to do it. They were so impressed with the plane that they bought the company!! Alon made a number of speed/power changes to the airplane and reverted to providing rudder pedals as standard, with the 2-control by special order only. They changed from vertically sliding window entry to a sliding canopy. Why do I know so much about ‘Coupes?? I learned to fly in a 1966 Alon A2A AirCoupe which I now own with my brother. I consider my Cheetah to be a 4-place ‘Coupe! Some people dump on ‘Coupes, much as they dump on "Grummans". Its unfair and ignorant criticism. But, as with the Grummans, it keeps the prices down and the secret in the family!! My brother, for instance, owns a Pitts S2B, a Pitts S1, a Taylorcraft and the ‘Coupe. He flies airshows in his Pitts and was a Canadian aerobatics champion. Which is his favourite plane?? The ‘Coupe!! If you ever have to opportunity to fly a ‘Coupe – try it!!

Response: