Re: Continuous Tone Definition


Steve Shapiro (sgshiya@redshift.com)
Tue, 12 Jan 1999 18:36:47 -0800


Subject: Re: Continuous Tone Definition

>I have the feeling that someone out there has an ax to grind, and
>is trolling for an argument. Nevertheless ...
>
>this is so ridiculous I hate
>typing it.
>
>
>The point is, the discussions of this type is, in my view
>pointless.

Amen.

>Now, we have some people telling us that there is no such thing as
>continuous tone. I guess every film manufacturer, tens of thousands of
>photographers, lab workers, writers, photo editors, film developers and
>scientists, the whole of the entire body of all optical associations -
>worldwide, ..... all of them have it wrong?

Yeah, I heard this in the '50's by the time I was a Boy Scout.

>Try telling them that there is
>no such thing as continuous tone.

Forbiden to learn something new, don't ya know?

Though, we know now, light is a solid. The example found through reverse
engineering of the laser that allows light to cut through stone.

>Good Day
>
>
>RM

and to you, RM
SS
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:41