User talk:Hoary/Archive 01

Fujica medium formats

I like very much your Fujica G690 page. If the other medium format Fuji cameras are already on your todo list, I would be interested to hear something about the Fujica G645. I know very few things about it and it seems that you have the proper documentation to make something interesting. (I'm not giving you instructions, just saying that I'm personally more interested by the G645 than by the later generation of 6×7 and 6×9. You can ignore this post if you don't plan to write about the other Fuji MF cameras.) --Rebollo fr 04:24, 13 June 2006 (EDT)

Thank you for the flattery! There's more to be done on Fujica G690 and its close successors, and then it would be pretty easy to write up their fixed-lens 6x7, 6x8 and 6x9 successors. I'd been vaguely intending to do this, plus more on the Fujipet (of which there are two more models) and also a page about the Super Fujica Six. But I don't have much depth of information on any but the 6x7—6x9 models. Still, what little I have sufficed for Fujica Six, so I suppose that yes, I can do the others as well. Not all that soon, perhaps.

I must get around to providing some (legitimate) photos of some of these, too. I already have my own photos of the Super Fujica Six, and I can easily photograph a Fujica Six and a Fujica G690 BL. -- Hoary 04:51, 13 June 2006 (EDT)

I was seriously meaning it! For example the G690 descending from the Combat Graphic is a funny story. So it's a grandson of the Contax II! It should have been called "Texas Contax" instead of "Texas Leica".

I will try to take pictures for some articles too. Step #1: I stop buying completely unusable cameras (like British 9×12 press cameras, about which I have to write something sooner or later). Step #2: I usefully spend the money buying a good digital camera. But I regularly get lost somewhere between step 1 and step 2, buying other weird things (for example a huge book full of 70-year old ads) and I have to restart the full process again. --Rebollo fr 06:21, 13 June 2006 (EDT)

Welcome Sysop!

Hey, Hoary. Thanks for the heads-up about that "wheels" guy. Pretty lame. He's over at Wikipedia too? Meh. Anyhow, I really appreciate all the time you've been putting in here... adding lots of value... good stuff.

I've just upgraded your account to sysop. w00t! --Lbstone 11:46, 24 June 2006 (EDT)

To display with the Elbow flex and the Lord Martian...

I think you also need a Shinkoh Rabbit! Especially if the rabbit's head logo is prominently engraved somewhere. --Rebollo fr 17:50, 2 August 2006 (EDT)

Aha, yes, that prompts me to launch a best(iary) of Camerapedia (tip of the hat to the Bonzo Dog Band). Hold on a few hours. -- Hoary 19:22, 2 August 2006 (EDT)

Minolta Pro

--Well, I've told you what I know! - Tim

Articles about camera magazines

I noticed that you wrote some articles about camera magazines in Wikipedia (Asahi Camera, Camera Mainichi, Nippon Camera, and maybe others), do you think that an adapted version would have its place here? --Rebollo fr 09:48, 24 October 2006 (EDT)

Funny that you should ask; I'd been wondering about this myself. First, the facts: there are (so far) only those three, and I've no immediate plan to increase the number, nor any reason to think that anyone else there is interested. Also, as you can see, there's next to nothing in them about cameras. Moreover, I can't think of anything more that I'm able to say and want to say about the coverage of cameras in any of them.

So while I'd have no objection to their appearing here as articles, I can't see the point. (Moreover, I don't think there's any precedent. However, derivatives could be useful within Sources: Japanese language. (Or perhaps the latter should be split up into Sources: Japanese-language books, Sources: Japanese-language magazines, and Sources: Japanese-language exhibition catalogues before it gets too big and unwieldy.) -- Hoary 22:58, 24 October 2006 (EDT)

Yes, a shortened version would best fit as some subset or page linked from the Sources: Japanese language. And it's true that the latter could be split up.

By the way, I've already heard you say (in some CP talk page?) that the Japanese magazines were published many months before the cover date. Of course you have first hand experience of this for today's issues, but do you know for sure if this is an old practice? I wonder if there is some source that comments on this (trivial) issue. --Rebollo fr 09:25, 25 October 2006 (EDT)

My opinion

I would say go for it, but only in black and with the motordrive. It's sooo important to keep a low profile and to shoot the 72 exposures fast. --Rebollo fr 18:39, 6 January 2007 (EST)

A stroll to Ginza?

If you are going to Ginza one of these days, why not coming back with pictures of this building, former seat of Hattori Tokei-ten (map here)? Not only it is a rare testimony of the Tokyo of the 30s, but it is also an important place for industrial Japan, from Seiko to Epson and Topcon.

And if the way back home casually leads you through Nihonbashi, maybe you can have a stop at the Mitsukoshi department store (description and map), another nice building from 1935. --Rebollo fr 16:12, 13 January 2007 (EST)

The former (Wako store) is also famous for having housed the most famous "PX"; PXes were military stores where the GIs could buy their "CPO"-marked photographic gear (and much else). And outside the PXes (or anyway outside this very famous one) were the panpan girls, girls of easy virtue who would be particularly friendly to GIs who hadn't blown their paypackets on toys.

OK, shall do. Keep kicking my rear end about my reluctance to supply any photo of anything. -- Hoary 23:52, 13 January 2007 (EST)

Patent search

Google Patents: what a great find! However there is also espacenet from the European Patent Office. I think that it has even more patents than Google, with German patents for example. (I have not made any objective comparison.)

When some patent is available at both places, which one would you choose to link to? For some reason, I would tend to prefer the latter. Google is a great tool, but it's also a company that is beginning to manage a bit too much info for my taste.

Let's not forget the Industrial Property Digital Library (alias 特許電子図書館)!

--Rebollo fr 06:48, 20 January 2007 (EST)

I agree on everything you say in the first two paragraphs; as for the third, I haven't investigated that yet.

Quite aside from the Google URLs, I'm not happy about the way I've referred to the patents. I'll return to this a little later.

I hope you haven't emailed me very recently: dvoi.com seems to be kaput. I'm looking into this. -- Hoary 07:02, 20 January 2007 (EST)

Rebollo fr, I'm too sleepy to organize my thoughts on patent references neatly, but as you're busily adding links to US patents, I'll hazily point out that I think it's better for the link to make explicit that it's a US patent, to make explicit the number, to provide at least the year when the application was made and the year the patent was granted, and to provide the precise title. (It might also be good to put in the name of the person to whom it was granted, and the [wossitcalled?] "assignee".) This might even benefit from a template. Sorry I can't say more but my head's already crashing into the keyboard. -- Hoary 10:56, 20 January 2007 (EST)

I agree and will store my finds in my user page until this is settled. About dvoi.com, did you get my mail about the Viceroy? --Rebollo fr 14:10, 20 January 2007 (EST)

Copyvio

Looks like you shot faster than me on Norita! Notice that the same page was added to en:wikipedia. I added a copyvio banner there but don't know what else to do. --Rebollo fr 04:49, 29 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks. At WP it was slightly more complicated as a poor, stubby but legitimate article was replaced with an illegitimate one. I just reverted the edits, posting as a warning a slightly edited version of the one I was about to post to the editor's page here (but you'd beaten me to it). -- Hoary 04:57, 29 January 2007 (EST)