On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:41:35 -0600, Ignoramus19723
wrote:

On 2018-02-20, Leon Fisk wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:37:38 -0500
"Jim Wilkins" wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 11:20:32 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]

Well, not to argue, but to add some clarification: If she's setting
up
a keyway-cutting job, you won't see any chips. And if she's
adjusting
X-Y position to cut from or to a scribed line, her hands would be on
two handwheels. That still doesn't explain what's going on, even if
it's correct. There are other things that don't look right.

As for the photos, having taken photos of machine operations for 40
years, including for over 500 articles and dozens of magazine
covers,
I'm just used to making sure it's real. Of course my readers, who
were
real industry people, would know the difference and would raise hell
if I faked it. g

I assume the photo was shot as part of a general war-promotion
story,
and photo composition probably was more important that photo
veracity.

My reaction was that they borrowed the boss' pretty secretary for the
photo shoot. I don't expect models to know -anything- beyond how to
pose.

What struck me as out-of-place were her shoes. Seem fancy for that
kind of work. No sparks in the grinder image. Look at the coworkers
shoes in same. The toe on their left shoe looks well scuffed up...


It is hard to tell, but it seems she has long fingernails.

Rosie the Riveter was part of a government program to encourage women
to work in industry to replace the men who were in the army. The most
commonly known version of Rosie is probably the 29 May 1943 Saturday
Evening Post front page, painted by Norman Rockwell showing a woman
with a rivet gun sitting in front of the U.S. Flag background.

http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2...e-riveter.html
--
Cheers,

John B.