U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: Article Posted (RE: Sury & Misonne)

Re: Article Posted (RE: Sury & Misonne)



Judy wrote:

Wow, that was quick -- both Dave AND the mail. I think it arrived before something I mailed to 102nd Street. (OK, no comments please.)

As for "typos", et al -- I noticed several broken letters in the original, so that, for example, an "m" could come out looking like an "n," or a "u" like an "i." I was tempted to fix them, but reality was that the original type was verrrry small so that any handwork on my part would be a worse botch. (No magazine could get away with that size type today -- maybe then folks didn't actually get old enough for their eyes to go dim :-(...?)

If I'd taken the time to go to the local copy shop I could have enlarged the type by 15 or 20% which might have improved it enough to make up for the extra "generation." My machine, for reasons of its own devising, only enlarges to 141%, which doesn't fit on the page. (It reduces in several degrees.)

But I decided better to try the single generation, hope for the best, and get on with the rest of the Augean stables around here. I didn't notice anything that seemed to obscure meaning... (tho if it really obscured meaning I could have missed it...) OK enough sophistry... Thanks very much Dave. And thanks in advance to folks who will enlighten us further from their further findings...

Dave wrote:

In general the OCR software does a good job. It has some problems with
numbers, so I manually edited some of them. Other than that, I haven't done
much editing. Occassionally some character are mis-recognized but you can
probably guess what the originals are. I haven't read through the article
(the xerox or the converted file) myself. If you find some words that are
not clear, please let me know, and I will check the xerox copy for you.

I haven't done much formatting either. I am putting this up quickly so that
those who are interested can check quickly. Eventually I might go back and
do some formatting so that it would look nicer.

The link is
http://members.aol.com/fotodave/Articles/PhotographicReview.html


Dave