Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]George Weir wrote: >>> If there is no difference in results as you say then why would it be > that clients, photographers and non-photographers can correctly identify > the "better photos" when shown a set taken under same circumstances, > using same film, developer, paper etc.?<<<< Hi George, There maybe a discrepancy in the wording: >>photographers and non-photographers can correctly identify the "better photos" <<<<<< I wondered if you meant >>> " crisper, sharper, contrasty etc etc" as all being positive adjectives in complimenting the image, as opposed to: >>the "better photos"<<< which implies a better photo as in content. Am I correct in this assumption? ted Ted Grant Photography Limited www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant - ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Weir" <george@georgeweir.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 7:54 AM Subject: Re: [Leica] the 90% rule-long, rambling BS from Walt > Ok Walt I'll bite, and no flame intended; > > > and I'll also beg to differ; > > Even Erwin states (if somewhat cryptically) that the ONLY way to > > see the superiority of this glass is to use a tripod, > My tripod has not been out of the trunk for at least six months and yet > I somehow still see the superiority of the glass. > > BTW who's Erwin? Elliot? > > Also I'm interested as to what are considered examples of > > 'real world' films > > PS wanna buy some "acceptable" nikkors? > They just don't take the same photographs! > > > All good things to you and yours > > George > > George Weir Photography > www.georgeweir.com > Phone 717-581-0389 > Toll-free 877-934-7368 > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html