Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Er. Well, I read the reference and found it extremely interesting. I didn't recognize it from your description, so I read it again. Results below. Austin Franklin wrote: > Thanks, I understand the issue, and the overall issue is separate from > Irwin's comments. I know Robert's site well, in fact, I am referenced a > number of times on it. I couldn't find the references to "Franklin". Which ones were they? > The original post specifically mentioned Hasselblad. There is ONE vague > comment in your reference, referencing Hasselblad, that 'some people' > (unqualified) 'wait' for the film to settle after winding the film. I found 3 items referencing "Hasselblad". There were many more (including a flatness table) that referenced "2 1/4 SLRs". Do you think Hasselblad should be excluded from the latter category? Note: The references to "Hasselblad" you mentioned is quoted in its entirety below: "Persons using Hasselblad film backs, in which the film curves twice around the back, have experienced problems with film buckling right after the film was advanced. Let the film sit for awhile, and the film "relaxes" and flattens out, producing a better and sharper on film image" It doesn't sound vague to me. > The conclusion is pure speculation, since there is no reference to anyone > actually measuring the effect of 'waiting', and mechanically, I find the > assertion unwarranted. Have you measured it? What were your results? > All I was asking for were facts, and clarification. And you did it very nicely. I agree that no rant was involved. >I don't like to deal > in speculation and the ethereal when claims like this are made. The reference and its measurements are neither speculative nor ethereal. Would you care to share your more concrete observations with us? Some of us are keenly interested in this topic! Thanks, Mike Quinn