50mm pictures with D300

In article <5vr8ksF1n9v61U1.DeleteThis@mid.individual.net>,
Chris Malcolm <cam.DeleteThis@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

> I've never been at the edges of a
> pack of presshounds surrounding a celebrity.

I've never been a newsie either, but I've shot HS and college sports
(mainly American football) with the occasional shot published in local
rags, and wasn't shy about putting myself as close to the action as the
pros were.

I learned on a TLR, and a standard practice when blocked or boxed in by
a mob scene was to hold the inverted camera overhead and look up into
the finder. When I used an SLR to shoot "post-game hysteria", I started
removing the prism, slipping it into my pocket and looking up into the
finder screen the same way. Not good for the camera, but Nikon F's led a
pretty hard life in those days, and dust was the least of it...

"Rules are made to be broken" applies with a vengeance when it comes to
photography. My old prejudice against zooms, as well as rigidity of mind
when choosing the "right" lens for a job, these are long gone. I've
learned that the sharpest lens is not always the best for portraits,
mixing light sources is definitely not taboo, "macro" can be done well
without buying a "macro lens" or even a bellows, and (hardest lesson of
all) 1/8 sec is a useful shutter speed. Whatta world!
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Paul Furman <paul- DeleteThis @-edgehill.net> wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
>>> PixelPix wrote:
>>
>>>> As for face stretching at the extreme wide.... as I stated earlier,
>>>> that is distortion and it will vary from lens design to lens design
>>>> and is not associated with perspective.
>>
>> It's a natural effect of perspective projection of a wide
>> angle of view onto a plane. That it has nothing to do with lenses is
>> demonstrated by the fact that it occurs in pinhole cameras. Because
>> most lenses try to emulate the natural rectilinear projection of the
>> pinhole camera they produce the same effect.

> The human eye has a curved sensor though. Does that matter?

Yes, but it's more complicated than that, because what we "see" isn't
the photograph that would be taken by a camera built like an eye with
a similarly curved sensor. What we "see" is the result of a great deal
of complex processing of not just one retinal snapshot, but a kind of
internal panoramic stitching in the brain from saccadic retinal
snapshots and interpolations based on expectations, plus two-eye
stereo, plus what is known as sensory projection, which gives us the
impression that we're seeing things "out there" at their real
distances in the world.

Given the importance of straight lines in navigation, throwing, etc.,
our brain in conjunction with evolution has "decided" that the most
sensible image projection to use is one which preserves straight
lines, hence rectilinear projections look the most realistic to us.

Not to mention that comprehending a photograph or painting as a
representation of a seen scene is quite a sophisticated visual trick
which only animals with the biggest brains are capable of mastering


--
Chris Malcolm cam DeleteThis @infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems John Navas <spamfilter1 RemoveThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On 23 Jan 2008 11:32:19 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam RemoveThis @holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote
> in <5vomu3F1n8mvjU2 RemoveThis @mid.individual.net>:

>>In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems John Navas <spamfilter1 RemoveThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>> On 23 Jan 2008 01:51:38 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam RemoveThis @holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote
>>> in <5vnktaF1medstU1 RemoveThis @mid.individual.net>:
>>
>>>>In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Kinon O'Cann <fuged RemoveThis @bout.it> wrote:

>>>>> Right. But you still can't zoom with your feet. It's simple, isn't it?
>>>>
>>>>It's a figure of speech known as analogy. Seems that in this newsgroup
>>>>that's far too complicated a concept
>>
>>> It's an invalid analogy. Very simple concept.
>>> "Bad advice is worse than no advice at all."
>>
>>What makes something an analogy is having some points of
>>similarity. There are also differences. The existence of the
>>differences is what makes it an analogy rather than an equation or
>>identity. The differences don't make it invalid. An analogy is invalid
>>when it claims a similarity which doess not exist, not the inevitable
>>fact that there are also differences where the analogy ceases to hold.
>>
>>In this case the claimed similarity exists. Therefore it is an
>>analogy. You may therefore logically argue that it is a poor analogy,
>>but not that it is an invalid analogy.

> The claimed similarity does not exist. Moving changes perspective.
> Zooming does not. While moving does change subject magnification, so
> does cropping, so by your logic, cropping is an analogy to zooming and
> to moving. That's a path to confusing madness.

>>As I said, the concept of "analogy" is a bit complicated for this
>>newsgroup

> Not really, and insulting people doesn't make your argument any more
> persuasive.

Taking being accused of misunderstanding something as an insult is an
obstacle to learning which can sometimes be a serious impediment

--
Chris Malcolm cam RemoveThis @infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

> Photography is just an interest I've pursued enthusiastically at
> various times in my life. I've never been a professional in the sense
> of earning at least of my living from it. I've picked up occasional
> contracts now and then in order to finance a photographic
> purchase. The house I'm living in now is the first one I haven't set
> up a darkroom in. Seeing digital photography coming I gave all my
> darkroom kit to a young photographer who had been borrowing bits of
> it.
>
> --
> Chris Malcolm cam.DeleteThis@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
> IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
> [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
>
Did you do colour film / paper in your darkroom?

Digital really is a lot faster, but I do kind of miss all the dodging and
fidgeting under the enlarger.

Take Care,
Dudley
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

"Chris Malcolm" <cam DeleteThis @holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:5vqfnvF1nibocU1@mid.individual.net...
> The effect I'm referring to has nothing to do with lenses. It's an
> inevitable geometric consequence of projecting a wide angle of view
> onto a flat image plane. You can see it in a pinhole camera with no
> lens. It's pure perspective projection geometry. Every lens will show
> it to the extent that it approximates the simple rectilinear
> projection of the lensless pinhole camera, which is what most lenses
> try to do.

Which is why photographers have long understood that wide angle lenses do
not generally make for good portraits, given that a persons face is not a
flat plane

MrT.
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Mr.T <MrT@home> wrote:

> "Chris Malcolm" <cam.RemoveThis@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:5vqfnvF1nibocU1@mid.individual.net...
>> The effect I'm referring to has nothing to do with lenses. It's an
>> inevitable geometric consequence of projecting a wide angle of view
>> onto a flat image plane. You can see it in a pinhole camera with no
>> lens. It's pure perspective projection geometry. Every lens will show
>> it to the extent that it approximates the simple rectilinear
>> projection of the lensless pinhole camera, which is what most lenses
>> try to do.

> Which is why photographers have long understood that wide angle lenses do
> not generally make for good portraits, given that a persons face is not a
> flat plane

A room interior or a table top isn't a flat plane either, but we
nevertheless consider that natural views of them require lenses of
shorter focal lengths than the canonical facial portrait lenses.

The more general photographic point is that what we consider a natural
perspective of something is the combination of distance and angle of
view at which we most usually look at it carefully and from which we
form our canonical impressions of what it looks like.

--
Chris Malcolm cam.RemoveThis@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

Scott W wrote:
>
> The pointing of the camera clearly changes the perspective.
>
> If you point the camera level vertical lines with not converge,
> put the camera up and vertical lines do converge.

I think it would help a lot in this discussion if whenever perspective is
mentioned, the speaker specifies whether they mean the perspective of the
eye (what a human observer would see from a particular position), or the
perspective of an image (a projection of the view onto a plane at that
position).

If an image is viewed at a different angle to that of the image plane at the
time of capture, the image will show different convergence of parallel lines
to what the photographer's eye saw.
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

>>>>>>> What is the "distance to the subject" in the case of a landscape
>>>>>>> photograph ranging from near foreground to distant horizon? Is the
>>>>>>> subject the person leaning against a tree six feet from the camera,
>>>>>>> or the full moon rising over the horizon, some quarter of a million
>>>>>>> miles away?
>>>>>> The subject is everything or anything within your picture and the
>>>>>> perspective is how they relate to each other..... this relationship
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> governed by where you place you camera. As soon as you move it, the
>>>>>> relationship changes.

>>>>> That is exactly my point. The perspective of an image has to with the
>>>>> relationships between all of the things in the entire image. That is
>>>>> determined by three things, the position of the camera, where it's
>>>>> pointing, and the subtended angle of view. Note that I said "position"
>>>>> of the camera. That determines its spatial relationship to everything
>>>>> in the image. "Distance to subject" doesn't work when the subject has
>>>>> no clearly identifiable distance or is multiple. You can also change
>>>>> perspective of the subject without changing distance, as in the case
>>>>> where you move a face from the centre of a wide angle view to the edge
>>>>> and it gets oddly stretched out.
>>>>>
>>>>> The three necessary and sufficient determinants of simple rectilinear
>>>>> image perspective are position, direction of view, and subtended angle
>>>>> of view.
>>>>>
>>>> Position is the only factor that dictates perspective.
>>>>
>>>> Direction of view is meaningless, as perspective is evident within a
>>>> singular image and it matters not where the camera is pointing.....
>>>> rotate the camera around a constant point (nodal) and it is only the
>>>> image content that changes, not the perspective.... that's why
>>>> stitched panos work.
>>> Pano stitching has to undo a lot of distortion but yes the underlying
>>> relationship between subjects remains.
>>>
>>>
>>>> As for face stretching at the extreme wide.... as I stated earlier,
>>>> that is distortion and it will vary from lens design to lens design
>>>> and is not associated with perspective.
>>> The only differences between lenses are rectilinear or fisheye (well I
>>> think there is another one but it doesn't vary much between lenses of a
>>> particular type). The geometry of the subject however varies depending
>>> where you point the lens. Point perpendicular to a building and it's
>>> walls have straight verticals, point up at a tall building and it tapers
>>> to the top.
>>>
>>> I learned to draft on paper and I remember constructing perspective
>>> views you typically abstract it by doing a two point perspective or
>>> maybe three point. A four point perspective is more like a fisheye lens
>>> though.
>>>
>>> http://www.termespheres.com/perspective.html
>>> 30-point perspective:
>>> http://im-possible.info/english/art/various/dick-termes.html
Snip ...


>> Hey, Paul, would you attribute the curving and tapering of walls /
>> buildings as being part of the perspective phenomena? Or, should it more
>> properly be attributed to lens distortion?
>>
>> If the latter, can we therefore talk about a "fish-eye perspective,"
>> "telephoto perspective" or "normal Perspective"?
>
> If it's a mild effect, it's called barrel distortion, more severe is a
> fisheye projection. Zoom lenses can show a little pincusion at other
> lengths too.

It seems to me that a lot of the confusion of the previous thread came from
the number of ways in which perspective can be interpreted.

The term seems to be used to describe the relationship of all the components
of an image to all the other elements, to explain the progressive reduction
of image size and spacing as one receeds into the distance, and to describe
the way in which a three dimensional object is projected onto a flat pane.
Various names are given to these differing interpretations of the term:
linear, rectilinear, fish-eye, panorama, vanishing point, etc. And nobody
has any idea of how the term is being used in any particular segment of the
discussion.

To muddy the waters even further there are other, very similar concepts,
such as distortion which some people (those who adhere to the linear
perspective mindset) do not accept as affecting perspective but others
(those who look at perspective as the relationship of objects to each other)
recognize as a fairly important characteristic, if not an actual determinate
of how the 3 dimensional object is rendered 2 dimensionally.

Moreover, the term zoom is multi-facetted. Its most general meaning is to
move quickly and purposefully in a given direction. But, it also has a more
specific meaning in that it is accepted by professional and
semi-professional photographers as the process of changing the focal length
of a multi-elemented lens.

Lastly, language has impacted the discussion ie. the concept of metaphore:
describing one thing by comparing it to another without using words such as
"like" or "as."

I think it's safe to say that the previous thread resulted from, not a
miss-use of the term zoom, but rather a failure of some to accept the
implied metaphore because it violated the fairly rigid parameters of the
particular interpretation of perspective the individuals had adopted.

For the purposes of this discussion, what really interests me, is that some
of these definitions tend to overlap.

For instance, perspective is used to describe / understand the relationship
of the elements of an image to each other and, hence, is a very useful
concept for an artist to understand -- especially during the design phase
when the artist is establishing what elements are to be used, and where they
are to be placed in order to create the final image.
However, when getting down to the technical details of how to actually
transfer the three dimensional object from the real world onto the 2
dimensional plane of the final print, the concepts of linear and rectilinear
perspective are both important and, sometimes, difficult to separate in a
given discussion.

For the purposes of this discussion, would it be useful to establish some
definitions? And, perhaps, try to establish a framework within which to use
a particular definition?

Sounding Way Too Academic,
Dudley
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

In article <Zq2mj.39912$fj2.38631@edtnps82>,
"Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:

> >>>>>>> What is the "distance to the subject" in the case of a landscape
> >>>>>>> photograph ranging from near foreground to distant horizon? Is the
> >>>>>>> subject the person leaning against a tree six feet from the camera,
> >>>>>>> or the full moon rising over the horizon, some quarter of a million
> >>>>>>> miles away?
> >>>>>> The subject is everything or anything within your picture and the
> >>>>>> perspective is how they relate to each other..... this relationship
> >>>>>> is
> >>>>>> governed by where you place you camera. As soon as you move it, the
> >>>>>> relationship changes.
>
> >>>>> That is exactly my point. The perspective of an image has to with the
> >>>>> relationships between all of the things in the entire image. That is
> >>>>> determined by three things, the position of the camera, where it's
> >>>>> pointing, and the subtended angle of view. Note that I said "position"
> >>>>> of the camera. That determines its spatial relationship to everything
> >>>>> in the image. "Distance to subject" doesn't work when the subject has
> >>>>> no clearly identifiable distance or is multiple. You can also change
> >>>>> perspective of the subject without changing distance, as in the case
> >>>>> where you move a face from the centre of a wide angle view to the edge
> >>>>> and it gets oddly stretched out.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The three necessary and sufficient determinants of simple rectilinear
> >>>>> image perspective are position, direction of view, and subtended angle
> >>>>> of view.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Position is the only factor that dictates perspective.
> >>>>
> >>>> Direction of view is meaningless, as perspective is evident within a
> >>>> singular image and it matters not where the camera is pointing.....
> >>>> rotate the camera around a constant point (nodal) and it is only the
> >>>> image content that changes, not the perspective.... that's why
> >>>> stitched panos work.
> >>> Pano stitching has to undo a lot of distortion but yes the underlying
> >>> relationship between subjects remains.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> As for face stretching at the extreme wide.... as I stated earlier,
> >>>> that is distortion and it will vary from lens design to lens design
> >>>> and is not associated with perspective.
> >>> The only differences between lenses are rectilinear or fisheye (well I
> >>> think there is another one but it doesn't vary much between lenses of a
> >>> particular type). The geometry of the subject however varies depending
> >>> where you point the lens. Point perpendicular to a building and it's
> >>> walls have straight verticals, point up at a tall building and it tapers
> >>> to the top.
> >>>
> >>> I learned to draft on paper and I remember constructing perspective
> >>> views you typically abstract it by doing a two point perspective or
> >>> maybe three point. A four point perspective is more like a fisheye lens
> >>> though.
> >>>
> >>> http://www.termespheres.com/perspective.html
> >>> 30-point perspective:
> >>> http://im-possible.info/english/art/various/dick-termes.html
> Snip ...
>
>
> >> Hey, Paul, would you attribute the curving and tapering of walls /
> >> buildings as being part of the perspective phenomena? Or, should it more
> >> properly be attributed to lens distortion?
> >>
> >> If the latter, can we therefore talk about a "fish-eye perspective,"
> >> "telephoto perspective" or "normal Perspective"?
> >
> > If it's a mild effect, it's called barrel distortion, more severe is a
> > fisheye projection. Zoom lenses can show a little pincusion at other
> > lengths too.
>
> It seems to me that a lot of the confusion of the previous thread came from
> the number of ways in which perspective can be interpreted.
>
> The term seems to be used to describe the relationship of all the components
> of an image to all the other elements, to explain the progressive reduction
> of image size and spacing as one receeds into the distance, and to describe
> the way in which a three dimensional object is projected onto a flat pane.
> Various names are given to these differing interpretations of the term:
> linear, rectilinear, fish-eye, panorama, vanishing point, etc. And nobody
> has any idea of how the term is being used in any particular segment of the
> discussion.
>
> To muddy the waters even further there are other, very similar concepts,
> such as distortion which some people (those who adhere to the linear
> perspective mindset) do not accept as affecting perspective but others
> (those who look at perspective as the relationship of objects to each other)
> recognize as a fairly important characteristic, if not an actual determinate
> of how the 3 dimensional object is rendered 2 dimensionally.
>
> Moreover, the term zoom is multi-facetted. Its most general meaning is to
> move quickly and purposefully in a given direction. But, it also has a more
> specific meaning in that it is accepted by professional and
> semi-professional photographers as the process of changing the focal length
> of a multi-elemented lens.
>
> Lastly, language has impacted the discussion ie. the concept of metaphore:
> describing one thing by comparing it to another without using words such as
> "like" or "as."
>
> I think it's safe to say that the previous thread resulted from, not a
> miss-use of the term zoom, but rather a failure of some to accept the
> implied metaphore because it violated the fairly rigid parameters of the
> particular interpretation of perspective the individuals had adopted.
>
> For the purposes of this discussion, what really interests me, is that some
> of these definitions tend to overlap.
>
> For instance, perspective is used to describe / understand the relationship
> of the elements of an image to each other and, hence, is a very useful
> concept for an artist to understand -- especially during the design phase
> when the artist is establishing what elements are to be used, and where they
> are to be placed in order to create the final image.
> However, when getting down to the technical details of how to actually
> transfer the three dimensional object from the real world onto the 2
> dimensional plane of the final print, the concepts of linear and rectilinear
> perspective are both important and, sometimes, difficult to separate in a
> given discussion.
>
> For the purposes of this discussion, would it be useful to establish some
> definitions? And, perhaps, try to establish a framework within which to use
> a particular definition?
>
> Sounding Way Too Academic,
> Dudley

Back in the days when I owned upwards of two dozen Nikkors, my wife
insisted I needed to put things in perspective, when I announced I was
thinking of buying another lens (I think the 24/2.8 had just been
released and we already had a 24/3.5).

"But that's why I need all these focal lengths: different perspectives."
I probably thought this was hilarious.

"I'm talking about a critical thinking perspective. How about making two
columns on a sheet of paper and looking at which equipment is paying for
itself?"

I ended up with a chart dividing the gear into categories like EARNS ITS
KEEP, SPECIAL PURPOSE, TOO NICE TO SELL, TOO UGLY TO SELL, WILL ONLY
TRADE FOR A NOCHT-NIKKOR, CAN DO WITHOUT. All the equipment fell in one
of the first five groups. The last had one entry: "bitching about money".
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

Dudley Hanks wrote:

> What about digital zoom? All that happens here is that the camera
> focuses its attention on a smaller portion of the sensor and then
> enlarges it digitally to fill the screen. Is that all that different from
> physically moving in on a subject in order to more fully fill the screen?

The point other posters are trying to get across to you is, yes, it is
fundamentally different.

> Not really, at least in my opinion.

Rather than give opinions, give them a sufficiently precise description of
the physics that explains how it isn't "all that different". I think only
that would shut them up.
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

"John Navas" <spamfilter1 RemoveThis @navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:e5dcp3tgh215fthumb6vqkgaa845driucj@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:17:15 -0000, "Sosumi" <sosumi RemoveThis @home.nl> wrote in
> <P4udne3EGa6TigvanZ2dnUVZ8t2snZ2d RemoveThis @novis.pt>:
>
>>"Rita Berkowitz" <ritaberk2008 RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:13pa78s4h83fc1a@news.supernews.com...
>>> Sosumi wrote:
>>>
>>>> While I was waiting for my new zoom lens, I only had the 50mm left.
>>>> So I thought about something someone said someday: take pictures
>>>> without a zoomlens to learn composition.
>>>> So for all you boys and girls I hauled my camera around town and
>>>> tried to see....
>>>> I think there's absolutely some truth in this. You do feel that you
>>>> have to "create" instead of zooming.
>>>
>>> You got it! You did good. I love the old 50 and it is nice to be able
>>> to
>>> get the results you want by zooming with your feet.
>
>>My feet are not that great, but it's worth it.
>>Ansel Adams had quite a few remarkable expressions that can help taking
>>better pictures. When wise men talk, I always listen..
>>
>>"A good photograph is knowing where to stand."
>
> Unfortunately, you have his meaning backwards. Perspective was very
> important to AA, a big part of what he was talking about. In other
> words, pick where to stand based on composition and perspective, and
> then select the lens needed to get that image. Moving in or out to
> compensate for the wrong lens is not knowing where to stand.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> John Navas
> Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

Or, only having a limited selection of lenses to choose from....
Or, looking for alternate images that may be equally as good as the first
view, maybe even better...
Or, the desire to create more than a single object from a single group of
subjects....
Or, an attempt to capture a specific lighting affect...
Or, the desire to improve one's photographic abilities by doing something
different....

Growing,
Dudley
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

"Paul Furman" <paul- DeleteThis @-edgehill.net> wrote in message
news:wOUlj.317$xq2.64@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
> The earth is round and you use various projections to fit its surface on
> a flat rectangular map just like a photograph.

Exactly, there are a few options, each with it's own compromises and
distortions. The only ones close to accurate are not rectangular.

MrT.
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

"John Navas" <spamfilter1 RemoveThis @navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:71lcp3hm5l9d8croj6glvl061cscsm5rsf@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:22:48 -0800 (PST), JimKramer <jimG RemoveThis @jlkramer.net>
> wrote in
> <e55a7148-d42f-4527-b8e6-f526fb9eca69 RemoveThis @l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>:
>
>>On Jan 22, 3:02 pm, "Rita Berkowitz" <ritaberk2... RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote:
>>> JimKramer wrote:
>>> > Have you used or heard the term "hot water heater"? Why would you
>>> > need to heat water that is already hot? And yet 98% of water heater
>>> > users refer to the water heater as a "hot water heater."
>>>
>>> Wrong! Depending on the application it can be called a booster heater
>>> or
>>> tempering tank. Some commercial applications need to boost standard
>>> 120º-140º hot water to 180º for safety and sanitary reasons. Nothing
>>> beats
>>> a kick-ass 480V three-phase booster heater!
>>>
>>> Rita
>>
>>Got one of those in your house? Delta or Y configuration for the
>>elements? What other 3-phase devices do you have installed at home?
>>What are you washing that needs to be sanitized so? Hmm... Got a
>>picture? No, never mind.
>>
>>Typically, I've seen a tempering valve used with a commercial water
>>heater to supply domestic hot water if a stand alone domestic water
>>heater was not warranted, i.e. a restaurant setting, but not a school
>>with a cafeteria.
>>
>>I suspect you should look up what a tempering tank really is and then
>>I will let you use the term "tepid water heater" when referring to the
>>water heater when installed in such situations.
>>
>>I always find it interesting to see what people actual do and don't
>>know.
>
> Especially in the case of Rita.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> John Navas
> Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
At least, John, Rita isn't running around telling people to get their hot
water heaters fixed.

Wink,
Dudley
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300