On Apr 11, 2006, at 11:44 AM, Dave Soemarko wrote:
> Oh, in that case yes, it must be underexposure then.
I agree, and I think I was talking about something a little different.
kt
Received on Tue Apr 11 13:21:35 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 05/01/06-11:10:24 AM Z CST