<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to make a DIY Flash Extender</title>
	<atom:link href="http://brentpennington.com/2010/01/how-to-make-a-diy-flash-extender/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://brentpennington.com/2010/01/how-to-make-a-diy-flash-extender/</link>
	<description>Official website &#38; blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 01:56:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Brent Pennington</title>
		<link>http://brentpennington.com/2010/01/how-to-make-a-diy-flash-extender/comment-page-1/#comment-1505</link>
		<dc:creator>Brent Pennington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 00:05:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brentpennington.com/?p=1781#comment-1505</guid>
		<description>Now you&#039;re making me second guess myself :-)

On mine, the smooth side faces the subject (ridges are inside, nearest the flash head).  Why?  I seem to recall trying it both ways when I was testing it out, and deciding that it seemed to work better like that.  From the photos I&#039;ve taken with it, it definitely works.  But now that you&#039;ve made me think, I&#039;ll have to try it the other way next time I use it, just to see!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now you&#8217;re making me second guess myself <img src='http://brentpennington.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>On mine, the smooth side faces the subject (ridges are inside, nearest the flash head).  Why?  I seem to recall trying it both ways when I was testing it out, and deciding that it seemed to work better like that.  From the photos I&#8217;ve taken with it, it definitely works.  But now that you&#8217;ve made me think, I&#8217;ll have to try it the other way next time I use it, just to see!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Foto</title>
		<link>http://brentpennington.com/2010/01/how-to-make-a-diy-flash-extender/comment-page-1/#comment-1502</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Foto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 21:54:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brentpennington.com/?p=1781#comment-1502</guid>
		<description>or perhaps I have that completely backwards...I think I may.  Light comes in to the ridged side and gets spread (i.e. magnified) as it exits the smooth side.  So, therefore, the smooth side should face the flash.  Correct?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>or perhaps I have that completely backwards&#8230;I think I may.  Light comes in to the ridged side and gets spread (i.e. magnified) as it exits the smooth side.  So, therefore, the smooth side should face the flash.  Correct?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Foto</title>
		<link>http://brentpennington.com/2010/01/how-to-make-a-diy-flash-extender/comment-page-1/#comment-1500</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Foto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 21:48:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brentpennington.com/?p=1781#comment-1500</guid>
		<description>It may be a dumb question, but which way should the ridges of the Fresnel face?  I assume towards the flash, as in &quot;opposite&quot; of magnification mode for enlarging a page of a book, for example.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It may be a dumb question, but which way should the ridges of the Fresnel face?  I assume towards the flash, as in &#8220;opposite&#8221; of magnification mode for enlarging a page of a book, for example.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brent Pennington</title>
		<link>http://brentpennington.com/2010/01/how-to-make-a-diy-flash-extender/comment-page-1/#comment-1094</link>
		<dc:creator>Brent Pennington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 20:30:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brentpennington.com/?p=1781#comment-1094</guid>
		<description>I cut it down to about 4x6&quot; - used the trusty Dremel tool.  Yeah, 8x11 would be way too big in the field.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I cut it down to about 4&#215;6&#8243; &#8211; used the trusty Dremel tool.  Yeah, 8&#215;11 would be way too big in the field.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zack Jones</title>
		<link>http://brentpennington.com/2010/01/how-to-make-a-diy-flash-extender/comment-page-1/#comment-1087</link>
		<dc:creator>Zack Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:37:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brentpennington.com/?p=1781#comment-1087</guid>
		<description>So do you actually use the full 8x11 sheet or did you cut it down any? Seems like 8x11 could be pretty unwieldy out in the field if the wind were blowing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So do you actually use the full 8&#215;11 sheet or did you cut it down any? Seems like 8&#215;11 could be pretty unwieldy out in the field if the wind were blowing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
