Provocative? Me? You want to step outside and say that again, buster? ;-)
Thanks for what I am taking as a compliment (now *that's* provocative)
I have to admit that I misunderstood what Michael was describing, and having
now seen the offending images, I think my speculation was misplaced! This is
not chromatic aberration.
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Keller [mailto:om-list@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 18 August 2010 02:20
To: 'Olympus Camera Discussion'
Subject: Re: [OM] 612 film back advice is needed.
Interesting thought Piers (you often seem to have provocative ideas) ...
potentially easier to get the film in a known location. However view cameras
used flat pieces of glass. History would compel new view cameras to have as
flat as possible image planes.
Horseman, Sinar, & Canham are as flat as my metal straight edge and eye can
see.
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Piers Hemy [mailto:piers@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 2:56 AM
To: 'Olympus Camera Discussion'
Subject: Re: [OM] 612 film back advice is needed.
That was my first thought, Brian, but after further contemplation, I
speculate that if the flatness of the back is not matched to the flatness of
the image produced by the lens, then any chromatic aberrations (there must
be some) would be exaggerated. In fact, I suspect that a "good" 612 back
does *not* have a perfectly flat film plane, rather one which is slightly
curved. By how much might be an interesting question.
Piers
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|