[none]

["Rod Fleming" <rodfleming@sol.co.uk>]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0067_01BF43C5.6F09E140
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



- ------=_NextPart_000_0067_01BF43C5.6F09E140
Content-Type: message/rfc822;
	name="Gary D Whelan.eml"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Gary D Whelan.eml"

From: "Rod Fleming" <rodfleming@sol.co.uk>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Subject: Gary D Whelan
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 10:37:05 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300

Hi

For you, Gary

I went to look at this shocking (?) image- well I had to, didn't I-, but the
page was down. I most sincerely hope that this is not the result of someone
here complaining about Pascal's images.

So I have not seen the particular item that so incensed Gary, but I have
seen Pascal's Glamour page before, and there is nothing, I repeat nothing,
shocking about it. Well, maybe for a Sunday School Yearbook, it's not
appropriate, but it's a Glamour page fer Pete's sake.

Gary is being prudish, and worse, much worse, censorious. He is trying to
prevent someone's perfectly legitimate point of view from being heard- or
seen- and is hiding behind a smokescreen of dubious morality to do so.

Pictures of people with no clothes on are an essential part of
representational art, as much in Photography as in Painting or Sculpture.

Ever heard of Edward Weston, Gary? Robert Mapplethorpe? Harry Callahan?
David Bailey? Bob Carlos Clark? For that matter Rubens, Delacroix or
Michaelangelo?  Hey, what do we do- burn all their images cos they portray
people in the state they were born in?

I agree, it's going to be a while before Pascal's pics are in my collection
alongside those names, but that's not the point here. Have we not moved on
from the point where Edward Weston had to go over his nudes of Charis Wilson
with a magnifying glass to ensure that not one pubic hair was visible-
otherwise he'd be prosecuted for mailing the pictures to his customers?

I'm going to stop there. I just want to say this:-

Pascal, you need to study light
more. There is no area of photography that shows up a
photographer's weakness or strength with light more than nude photography-
that's
right on the front line of pure form pal, and it takes guts to tackle it.
But at least you're doing it- you're taking pictures and you're putting them
up for others to see and comment on.

People who do that are called artists.


Best


Rod



- ------=_NextPart_000_0067_01BF43C5.6F09E140
Content-Type: message/rfc822;
	name="Scanners.eml"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Scanners.eml"

From: "Rod Fleming" <rodfleming@sol.co.uk>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Subject: Scanners
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:52:58 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300

Pascal wrote

1350 dpi- half the maximum


That's absolutely right.

I think it's worth pointing out that in all the Nikon Scan TWAIN controllers
I've seen, the "Output Resolution" defaults to "1350 pixels/inch".  Hoever,
it is fundamental to realise that this is at the default output SIZE of
1.79x2.64 inches, ie 2x the size of a 35mm neg. On this setting the scanner
is scanning at maximum optical, 2700 dpi (1350x2). I have often seen people
put the output res box up to 2700- without changing the "output size"- and
thus scan at an interpolated 5400 dpi. As has been pointed out, optical is
real info, interpolated is not.

Quite why Nikon do this, as it seems a bit of a pitfall for the unwary, I
don't know. And I'm not saying that either Pascal or anyone else is unaware
of this. However we have trained a number of people on the Nikon, and they
always get caught with that, so I thought it was worth flagging up.

The correct way to control the scan res on this TWAIN interface is to leave
the defaults alone and adjust the scaling- a horizontal slider under the
output res box.

Hope it helps


Cheers


Rod


- ------=_NextPart_000_0067_01BF43C5.6F09E140--