Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B
This entire thing has been very interesting. I would like to read the technical aspects of the lens distortion, or other distortions possibly caused by the emulsion.
I do have one question and one comment.
I don't see dating the matting as a purely negative exercise. It means more if the item os in hand, but it's not impossible for a photo to be recased either for style after production or by an owner using a similar case much later to replace a damaged case.
My question is - Corey owns the Dag in question. Why was the high resolution image obtained from Ken Burns? The only reason I can think of is knowing it existed made exposing the Dag to the light from scanning unecessary? (Although if I owned something like it I'd do my own high res scan)
Steve B
|
The high resolution image was obtained from Ken Burns because that was what was required to expose a missing portion of the irises. This is discussed in length in the newsletter supplement.