[rollei_list] Re: OT / prove it !
- From: "Austin Franklin" <austin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:20:10 -0500
Hi Eric,
> First of all, I so miss these little dances of the goony birds
> you used to share on the list so often...
Funny how you consider taking you to task for making silly claims as a
"dance". I consider it as slam dunk ;-)
> This discussion is reminiscent of one we had many months ago
> where you absolutely swore that the 13 x 19s you printed from 35
> were indistinguishable from MF enlargements.
You're obviously making this up (perhaps an April 1st joke?), as it is
something I NEVER said. If anything, I said you could make acceptable 13 x
19 prints from 35mm, but I NEVER said they were indistinguishable from MF.
This clear misrepresentation of facts makes it difficult to take you
seriously.
> Like this
> discussion, you went to great lengths to offer technical
> explanations for things I know to be untrue from simple
> observation.
It's amusing that you consider simple arithmetic "great lengths". ;-)
> As for providing the list with reliable information, those of us
> who have judged the differences in perceived sharpness (and
> tonality and texture) between formats in even modest enlargements
> and who see a clear difference believe other-wise and shoot accordingly.
I have never disagreed that in larger prints, why do you think I've been
shooting MF for some 20+ years? But, YOU said you could do so in a 5x7,
which I still contend is nonsense.
> No doubt a response from you will follow; I am done on this one...
Yes, make absurd claim, claim you are right when challenged, offering no
evidence that what you claim is even remotely possible, then ignore any
further discussion. If you want to make claims that can't stand up to any
challenge, this approach makes sense, and I understand why you do it.
Regards,
Austin
Other related posts:
