Re: Focal Length Redux

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 08:30 AM 9/19/2002 +0800, you wrote:
>Sorry to hear about the kidney stone.  *ouch*
>
>me@myplace.to wrote:
>> 
>> This may be because you are accustomed to seeing horrible results from
>> badly out of focus pinholes.
>
>Oops, the morphine hasn't worn off yet ;-)
>
>A pinhole can't be in or out of focus.  However, for each distance from
>the film plane there is an optimal size of pinhole.
>
>Smaller or larger than this optimum and the image will not be at its
>sharpest.
>
>Yeah, I know this *sounds* like focus, but it's not.  

Heh heh heh.... OK.

Steve, we are never going to be in harmony here because we are not on the
same page. Indeed, we may not be in the same song book! You can no more
agree with me than I with you.  We seem to have different definitions for
some basics.  So be it. I don't agree with what you said but I really
admire the way you said it.

Yours truly

Dave
East Englewood
-----------------------------
Dumb blond jokes don't bother me because I know I'm not dumb and I know I'm
not blond.
  -  Dolly Parton


[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux