Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/03

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] the 90% rule-long, rambling BS from Walt
From: Martins Zelmenis <martin@lrpv.lv>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 11:05:02 +0200
References: <SIMEON.10111020806.A@sova-walt.unt.edu> <01a501c163b6$aba37ae0$3e5bef88@compaq> <009a01c163ed$35ccd5a0$56234d18@gv.shawcable.net>

I'd like to add - or clarify - IMHO there are times when those adjectives
"crisper, sharper, contrasty etc etc" - if properly and justly applied -
simply add up to produce <the "better photos"<<< which implies a better
photo as in content.>.



Martin


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Grant" <tedgrant@home.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: sestdiena, 2001. gada 3. novembri 0:24
Subject: Re: [Leica] the 90% rule-long, rambling BS from Walt


> 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

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu> (Re: [Leica] the 90% rule-long, rambling BS from Walt)
Message from "George Weir" <george@georgeweir.com> (Re: [Leica] the 90% rule-long, rambling BS from Walt)
Message from "Ted Grant" <tedgrant@home.com> (Re: [Leica] the 90% rule-long, rambling BS from Walt)