RE: An optical and photographic absurdity

now I understand why I gravitate towards them... absurdity loves company..
andy

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pinhole-discussion@spitbite.org
[mailto:owner-pinhole-discussion@spitbite.org] On Behalf Of Nick Dvoracek
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 10:57 AM
To: pinhole discussion
Subject: [pinhole-discussion] An optical and photographic absurdity

I've started mining Stanley Page's bibliography

The first article I've gotten is "Upon Some Improvements Proposed by
Sir David Brewster in the Photographic Camera" by Edwin Emerson (1861) from
the British Journal of Photography.

In response to Brewster's description of the pinhole camera and the
benefits of small apertures with lenses in "The Stereoscope", Emerson
compares several lenses with various small apertures and a pinhole.

I almost didn't put it on my web site until I got to his conclusion
that a pinhole camera is an "optical as well as photographic
absurdity."

It's at http://idea.uwosh.edu/nick/oldarticles.htm

Nick
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nick Dvoracek
dvoracek@uwosh.edu
Director of Media Services Voice: 920-424-7363
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh Fax: 920-424-7324
My web site: http://idea.uwosh.edu/nick/handouts.htm
Media Services web site: http://idea.uwosh.edu/media_services/home.html

_______________________________________________
Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML pinhole-discussion mailing
list pinhole-discussion@spitbite.org FAQ at
http://spitbite.org/pinhole-discussion/list.html

_______________________________________________
Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
pinhole-discussion mailing list
pinhole-discussion@spitbite.org
FAQ at http://spitbite.org/pinhole-discussion/list.html
Received on Fri Nov 19 08:15:16 2004