Some aircraft assembly, a RR forge, and miss scrap metal posing draped
in swarf (that one made me cringe a bit, hope they pulled it off her
carefully).

http://pavel-kosenko.livejournal.com...hread=22669914

Dave

On 3/16/2012 11:16 AM, Dave__67 wrote:

Some aircraft assembly, a RR forge, and miss scrap metal posing draped
in swarf (that one made me cringe a bit, hope they pulled it off her
carefully).

http://pavel-kosenko.livejournal.com...hread=22669914

Dave


и��ледовани�, ��ылки

wgaf wrote in message ...
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:16:25 -0700 (PDT), Dave__67
wrote:


Some aircraft assembly, a RR forge, and miss scrap metal posing draped
in swarf (that one made me cringe a bit, hope they pulled it off her
carefully).

http://pavel-kosenko.livejournal.com...hread=22669914

Dave

there is nothing better than real film for photography, thanks for posting
those

Excellent photos, but I think mostly due to artful lighting, good framing,
etc.. They had to be scanned in to show on the web, so I'm not sure you can
attribute the quality to real film as opposed to digital, especially
compared to the current digital standards for professional photography.

On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 08:08:37 -0400, wgaf wrote:

On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:16:25 -0700 (PDT), Dave__67
wrote:


Some aircraft assembly, a RR forge, and miss scrap metal posing draped
in swarf (that one made me cringe a bit, hope they pulled it off her
carefully).

http://pavel-kosenko.livejournal.com...hread=22669914

Dave

there is nothing better than real film for photography,

Good digital cameras are quite close. (And please note that you said
that -after- seeing a -digital- representation of a film photo. g)
I was in Barnes and Noble the other day to look at Nooks. The fashion
mags take really high-resolution digital photos and the Nook can
display them at higher than hi-def rez. The look is flawless on
close-up shots of faces in the makeup ads. See for yourself.
I can't see spending $250 on a little screen like that, though.

thanks for posting those

Ditto. Did anyone else notice that nobody had hearing protectors,
even the riveters and steam drop hammer operators at the forge?

Dad flew one of those B-25s. He was shot down over France and taken
into a German concentration camp. He came out sixty pounds lighter
ten months later when the Russian tanks knocked down the fences.

--
The greatest justice in life is that your
vision and looks tend to go simultaneously.
-- Kevin Bacon

On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 09:18:31 -0400, "ATP"
wrote:


wgaf wrote in message ...
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:16:25 -0700 (PDT), Dave__67
wrote:


Some aircraft assembly, a RR forge, and miss scrap metal posing draped
in swarf (that one made me cringe a bit, hope they pulled it off her
carefully).

http://pavel-kosenko.livejournal.com...hread=22669914

Dave

there is nothing better than real film for photography, thanks for posting
those

Excellent photos, but I think mostly due to artful lighting, good framing,
etc.. They had to be scanned in to show on the web, so I'm not sure you can
attribute the quality to real film as opposed to digital, especially
compared to the current digital standards for professional photography.

The look of those 4x5 Kodachromes is magnificent. The old Time-Life
series of photography books reproduced some of them, and they look
like you're right there in the photo.

When I worked in NYC I used to visit the Nikon gallery on my lunch
hour every couple of weeks, where they changed the exhibit frequently.
One of them was all big dye-transfer fashion prints made from 4x5
Kodachromes and Ektachromes, mostly from the late '40s. I could look
at them all day.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 07:46:51 -0400, wgaf wrote:

On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 09:18:31 -0400, in rec.crafts.metalworking you wrote:


wgaf wrote in message ...
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:16:25 -0700 (PDT), Dave__67
wrote:


Some aircraft assembly, a RR forge, and miss scrap metal posing draped
in swarf (that one made me cringe a bit, hope they pulled it off her
carefully).

http://pavel-kosenko.livejournal.com...hread=22669914

Dave

there is nothing better than real film for photography, thanks for posting
those

Excellent photos, but I think mostly due to artful lighting, good framing,
etc.. They had to be scanned in to show on the web, so I'm not sure you can
attribute the quality to real film as opposed to digital, especially
compared to the current digital standards for professional photography.


I think you can tell, and the thing about professional quality digital, is
very few use the high end stuff, even when the reporters started with 10mp
that was not all that long ago, getting the full frame sensors out on the
market was a good step in the right direction but still does nto compete under
a loom with film

I've never heard the term "under a loom" before. (I don't weave.
A quick googling didn't help, either.

Anyway,

I was extremely happy with the pics I got from my Nikon 995. I
am thrilled with the detail I get from my Nikon D-40. And I would be
absolutely orgasmic with a D3x or D4, I'm sure. Film is -out- for me.
YMMV. If you can see a difference, feel free to go with film. About
99% of us are now happy with digital. And a vast section of the
unwashed is happy with phone camera pics and texting. Ptui!

--
The greatest justice in life is that your
vision and looks tend to go simultaneously.
-- Kevin Bacon

The hi-res original are alleged to be at:

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/fsac/
--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433