Dirge Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 That's a really crap train. Why didn't you find a picture of something decent, not the superannuated old workhorse from the local colliery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m3838 Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 (edited) That's a really crap train. Why didn't you find a picture of something decent, not the superannuated old workhorse from the local colliery? How's this one? Truly a magnificent symbol of human ingenuity. Edited January 14, 2008 by m3838 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirge Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 I just did. Are you sure you want more comments of that edifying quality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Dunk Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 *backs slowly out of room and closes door quietly* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirge Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 I just answered The Russians comment and while I'm doing it he completely changes it to something different, leaving my comment looking even less sensible than it started out.. Well really! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Dunk Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Well really! :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirge Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Here's a decent one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterT Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Here's a decent one. Here's a nice clean one, from a bit closer to home: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirge Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Mine's not a local one; the pic's taken on the Severn Valley Railway. Kiwi trains tend to look like they've escaped from the Wild West; I was showing M3838 what decent one looked like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m3838 Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 *backs slowly out of room and closes door quietly* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Here's a decent one. ...Here's a nice clean one, from a bit closer to home: ... They're nice, I suppose, but don't you have anything in amboyna? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Chambers Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 I'd challenge anyone to compare quality between a modern digital SLR and a 4x5 or 8x10 camera. They each have their uses but large format film still by far out performs digital snapshooters. That's something I was talking to my Gandolfi-owning friend Jim about the other night, will they ever make a digital camera that will come anywhere near the 7x17 or 12x20 banquet cameras? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McIsog Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 I'd challenge anyone to compare quality between a modern digital SLR and a 4x5 or 8x10 camera. They each have their uses but large format film still by far out performs digital snapshooters. I find that statement a bit bullying. Comparing the area of the film planes: 35mm = 24x36mm = 864 sq mm 4x5 = 101.2x127mm = 12903 sq mm 8x10 = 203.2x254mm = 51612 sq mm Exact sizes vary slightly by mat and film frame detail. If you had real cojones you would compare the Hasselblad CF-39MS Digital Back to a specific 4x5 camera, lens and a specific film. Yes the back cost alot of money but so does the processing of 4x5 film and printing if you correctly cost out the time involved. In a nutshell: Liars figure and figures Lie! So here goes - Film vs Digital Proof Theory. Film vs Digital Proof Practice. You can push the results back and forth by varying the film speed of both cameras. Now I'd say we are at least at a draw. Now if people want to continue this battle I'm afraid I'm gonna have to sic my bruiser on them: Cheers, Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Chambers Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Here's a decent one. ...Here's a nice clean one, from a bit closer to home: ... They're nice, I suppose, but don't you have anything in amboyna? Now you're talking! Like this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McIsog Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 (edited) Stephen, You have definitely cornered the market on cool old concertinas. Did you wind up buying that tortoise shell one that went off about a year ago? Dan Edited January 14, 2008 by McIsog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 They're nice, I suppose, but don't you have anything in amboyna? Now you're talking! Like this one? Oooh!! And with the lens cleverly hidden (I'm still looking for it), it should be great for taking candid photos. OOPS! My mistake. That was a response to my request for an amboyna railway engine. Neat! Even better than steam or diesel, that one appears to run on compressed air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Chambers Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Oooh!! And with the lens cleverly hidden (I'm still looking for it), it should be great for taking candid photos. OOPS! My mistake. That was a response to my request for an amboyna railway engine. Neat! Even better than steam or diesel, that one appears to run on compressed air. Oh sorry, I thought this thread had something to do with concertinas! In fact I'm not sure how we got onto steam locomotives at all - but it probably had something to do with "the Russians"? I doubt if you'd ever get a camera made of amboyna, being a burl wood it is only really suitable for veneering and would probably get damaged much too easily in serious use, but I believe I have seen it used for stereoscopic viewers. Of the harder concertina timbers, rosewood would be much more suitable, but with the disadvantage of being rather heavy, in fact the smaller of my friend Jim's Gandolfi cameras is a very rare example in rosewood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m3838 Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 I just answered The Russians comment and while I'm doing it he completely changes it to something different, leaving my comment looking even less sensible than it started out.. Well really! Sorry, didn't expect you to be so quick, and upon second reading of my post I found it to be unsatisfactory. So I changed it. It's called "Interactive". Isn't digital world is all about been "Interactive"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now