Austin,
You regularly chastise people for using inaccurate or incomplete terms.
Shall we discuss "depth of FIELD" versus "depth of FILM" as an
example, in spite of the fact that EVERYONE knew what the people were
referring to? Yet you found it necessary to "parrot" out of some obscure
book not
Why don't you guys just get married?
- Original Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Austin,
You regularly chastise people for using inaccurate or incomplete terms.
Shall we discuss "depth of FIELD" versus "depth of FILM" as an
example, in spite of the fact that EVERY
Oh Arthur,
> You regularly chastise people for using inaccurate or incomplete terms.
So, any time someone corrects someone that is technically inaccurate, that
is chastising them? Hardly.
> Shall we discuss "depth of FIELD" versus "depth of FILM" as an
> example,
That was depth of FOCUS, no
_id=161965
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 9:21 AM
> Subject: [filmscanners] Re: OT - anal(ly) retentive...
>
>
> But Jean-Pierre, in term
