Mailinglist Archives:
Infrared
Panorama
Photo-3D
Tech-3D
Sell-3D
MF3D

Notice
This mailinglist archive is frozen since May 2001, i.e. it will stay online but will not be updated.
<-- Date Index --> <-- Thread Index --> [Author Index]

re: curved mounts (((((


  • From: P3D <Linnstaedt@xxxxxxx>
  • Subject: re: curved mounts (((((
  • Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 09:49:06 -0400 (EDT)

Herr Dr. wrote:

<< Regarding Dennis' speculation that these old curved views might
 be curved to optimize optical performance... it is unlikely that it is the
case.  Seems that it should be curved the other way (horizontally) for that
to make some sense. >>

The best teachers cause us to think.  (So, Thank you, Dr. T.)  I have
pondered this mystery and thought of some possibilities (IMHO).
  
The curved mounts are somewhat more protected from abrasion, than a flat
mount, or especially one with its print on outside of curve.  Also, two views
are prevented from being stacked face to face.  (((((    but not   )(  or   (
)
Does anyone know whether there were concerns about contact damage from two
prints resting face to face?

[I have experienced modern prints damaged from various materials:  The clerk
at Wolf's camera placed an enlargement into its "protective" envelope with
the print facing the envelope's glued seam.  Permanently fogged a strip onto
my grandmother's portrait!]

Finally, it does occur to me that the answer to the curve question may be
found somewhere inside a can of Pringles potato crisps.
       This could take more research.  ;-)

-- Robert Linnstaedt


------------------------------