15" F/11 Red Dot Artar ?

Wild, man. Wild. E-4, that is.

http://www.b-29s-over-korea.com/aeri...raphy-pg1.html


--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index2.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

"John" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:07:01 -0700, "Richard Knoppow"
wrote:

The latter was mostly made for aerial mapping from
10x10 negatives.

Just a little question about this as the previous owner of my D138 was
working in this field. How fast do they usually fly and at what
altitude ? I'm pretty sure he told me they were using 5" roll film for
this.

9" roll film was also common, and sometimes in stereo. I don't know how high
or fast. Our base used rF101 Voodoos (fighter bomber), rB66 (bomber) and
was a drop for a U2. You can surf for more information.

In article , jjs wrote:

"____" wrote in message
...

Since I have always had a basement darkroom, I picture folks cutting
holes into their first floor dwelling spaces- since I have hardwood
floors that idea did not appeal to me. I guess not everyone has a
basement

Not all basements are high enough.

In my area, many of the basements are closer to being cellars - just tall
enough to permit a short person stand up straight. My house is over 110
years old and in the fifties it was elevated off the foundation and three
blocks were added to the stone foundation (and the dirt floor was replaced
with concrete). In fact, several houses around here went through the same.
Must have been some kind of post-war optimism thing, and it did work.
(Neither the DX2L nor the Focomat IIa touch the ceiling.)

When I bought my enlarger several years ago I decided basement height
was a priority.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

In article ,
John wrote:
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:07:01 -0700, "Richard Knoppow"
wrote:

The latter was mostly made for aerial mapping from
10x10 negatives.

Just a little question about this as the previous owner of my D138 was
working in this field. How fast do they usually fly and at what
altitude ? I'm pretty sure he told me they were using 5" roll film for
this.

I thought aero film for mapping was 10" or 5" rolls, giving a 4 3/4" or
9" square negative?

The diagonal of 9" square aero format is a little smaller than the
diagonal of 8x10" sheet film which is, supposedly, why some lenses
designed for mapping work, such as the Metrogon, do not really cover
8x10.

--
Thor Lancelot Simon

"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to
be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky

"Thor Lancelot Simon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
John wrote:
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:07:01 -0700, "Richard Knoppow"
wrote:

The latter was mostly made for aerial mapping from
10x10 negatives.

Just a little question about this as the previous owner of
my D138 was
working in this field. How fast do they usually fly and at
what
altitude ? I'm pretty sure he told me they were using 5"
roll film for
this.

I thought aero film for mapping was 10" or 5" rolls,
giving a 4 3/4" or
9" square negative?

The diagonal of 9" square aero format is a little smaller
than the
diagonal of 8x10" sheet film which is, supposedly, why
some lenses
designed for mapping work, such as the Metrogon, do not
really cover
8x10.

--
The actual negatives are about 9x9 but the enlargers are
set up for 10x10. Once upon a time you could get 10x10
paper. I used to get it at Freestyle and use it for
Rolleicord pictures.
The coverage of the Metrogon and some other aerial
lenses is probably marginal for 8x10.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA