See Nikon? Clasping hands over ears and repeating, "I can't hear, I can't hear..." only works for so long

In article ,
PeterN wrote:

On 6/16/2017 7:29 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 15:13:22 +0200, android wrote:


snip






Yup. And perspective distortion is a traditional and respected tool to
make a point on the nature of the subject.

Mainly because until the advent of digital photography it was not
possible to do anything much about it.


Except for tilting the enlarger head, .

Or swiveling the easel...

http://b-29s-over-korea.com/aerial%2...d_style_enlarg
er_sm.jpg

http://tinyurl.com/yabkmoau
--
teleportation kills

On 6/19/2017 1:38 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:



Yup. And perspective distortion is a traditional and respected tool to
make a point on the nature of the subject.

Mainly because until the advent of digital photography it was not
possible to do anything much about it.

Except for tilting the enlarger head, .

good luck getting fotomat to do that.


It accomplishes the purpose, within limits.

whooooooooooooooooooosh


I see that you were wrong again

--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:


Yup. And perspective distortion is a traditional and respected tool to
make a point on the nature of the subject.

Mainly because until the advent of digital photography it was not
possible to do anything much about it.

Except for tilting the enlarger head, .

good luck getting fotomat to do that.

It accomplishes the purpose, within limits.

whooooooooooooooooooosh

I see that you were wrong again

i see that you didn't understand what was said and made a fool of
yourself. again.

On 6/19/2017 5:21 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:


Yup. And perspective distortion is a traditional and respected tool to
make a point on the nature of the subject.

Mainly because until the advent of digital photography it was not
possible to do anything much about it.

Except for tilting the enlarger head, .

good luck getting fotomat to do that.

It accomplishes the purpose, within limits.

whooooooooooooooooooosh

I see that you were wrong again

i see that you didn't understand what was said and made a fool of
yourself. again.


typical avoidance from you. You certainly have experience at avoiding
asked for explanations. No reason to ask for your explanation. As in the
past, you will refuse to give one.

--
PeterN

On Jun 19, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 6/19/2017 5:21 PM, nospam wrote:
In , PeterN
wrote:


Yup. And perspective distortion is a traditional and respected tool
to
make a point on the nature of the subject.

Mainly because until the advent of digital photography it was not
possible to do anything much about it.

Except for tilting the enlarger head, .

good luck getting fotomat to do that.

It accomplishes the purpose, within limits.

whooooooooooooooooooosh

I see that you were wrong again

i see that you didn't understand what was said and made a fool of
yourself. again.

typical avoidance from you. You certainly have experience at avoiding
asked for explanations. No reason to ask for your explanation. As in the
past, you will refuse to give one.

I suspect you missed nospam’s rare outburst of humorin response to your
“tilting the enlarger head� suggestion with his; “good luck getting
fotomat to do that.�
Given the extremely long odds of finding a Fotomat anywhere these days, or
the darkroom skills of any Fotomat operator when they existed, his remark
made sense, even if it was in a sarcastic way.

Not that he was going to explain anything to you.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 06/19/2017 12:59 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:


Yup. And perspective distortion is a traditional and respected tool to
make a point on the nature of the subject.

Mainly because until the advent of digital photography it was not
possible to do anything much about it.

Except for tilting the enlarger head, .

good luck getting fotomat to do that.


My old (1985 or thereabouts Hope/Kreonite) minilab could have sort of
accomplished that to a limited extent. There was a fair amount of space
around the negative stage, so it would have been possible to raise one
side of the negative carrier. I have no idea how much depth of focus it had.

My current color enlarger, an Easco AF-45 has no provision for tilting
the enlarger head. But tilting the easel would be no problem.

--
Ken Hart

In article .com,
Savageduck wrote:


Mainly because until the advent of digital photography it was
not possible to do anything much about it.

Except for tilting the enlarger head, .

good luck getting fotomat to do that.

It accomplishes the purpose, within limits.

whooooooooooooooooooosh

I see that you were wrong again

i see that you didn't understand what was said and made a fool of
yourself. again.

typical avoidance from you. You certainly have experience at avoiding
asked for explanations. No reason to ask for your explanation. As in the
past, you will refuse to give one.

I suspect you missed nospam¹s rare outburst of humorin response to your
³tilting the enlarger head² suggestion with his; ³good luck getting
fotomat to do that.²
Given the extremely long odds of finding a Fotomat anywhere these days, or
the darkroom skills of any Fotomat operator when they existed, his remark
made sense, even if it was in a sarcastic way.

Not that he was going to explain anything to you.

it isn't just fotomat. that's just one of the most recognizable film
processing companies.

you won't fare any better at walmart or cvs.

at least you understood it, without any explanation.

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:01:24 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

There are always limits in he original. It i easy to say: "if
only......." The trick is to male the best of what you have,

And that applies to the guy with the camera too.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 10:25:18 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-06-19 16:56:18 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/16/2017 7:29 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 15:13:22 +0200, android wrote:

snip

Yup. And perspective distortion is a traditional and respected tool to
make a point on the nature of the subject.

Mainly because until the advent of digital photography it was not
possible to do anything much about it.


Except for tilting the enlarger head, .

https://www.dropbox.com/s/l1ls35qp5sbcylk/View-Camera-Adapter-G-Fujifilm-GFX.jpg

I bet they don't sell many like that.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article ,
Ken Hart wrote:

On 06/19/2017 12:59 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:


Yup. And perspective distortion is a traditional and respected tool to
make a point on the nature of the subject.

Mainly because until the advent of digital photography it was not
possible to do anything much about it.

Except for tilting the enlarger head, .

good luck getting fotomat to do that.


My old (1985 or thereabouts Hope/Kreonite) minilab could have sort of
accomplished that to a limited extent. There was a fair amount of space
around the negative stage, so it would have been possible to raise one
side of the negative carrier. I have no idea how much depth of focus it had.

My current color enlarger, an Easco AF-45 has no provision for tilting
the enlarger head. But tilting the easel would be no problem.

And the latter was that that most of us did. Not the Instamatic stuff
occasionally. The smart phones are to be compared for with the latter
but do I think that keynoting can be found in both Photoshop and
Lightroom for Android. Not that I thought that that was the thing to do
with the picture, taken and edit with my Xperia M4 on the go that been
sooo debated... ;-)
--
teleportation kills