Re: [KOML] hyperfocal focus

[Mel Brown <melbrown@eatel.net>]

John J Stafford wrote:

> From: Al Smith <adsmith@mailzone.com>
>
>
> > New York Inst of Photography still teach the use of hyperfocal
> distance.....
>
> So what?  They may teach the mathematical principle of hyperfocal, and that
> is real and worthy, but is their information CURRENT?  Come on, you are
> talking to a guy who studied physics and philosophy for over thirty years
> and is still in higher ed. Don't try to tell me that because somebody
> teaches SOMETHING that it is current.

John, as I read it, Al was merely stating a fact. I don't see what "current"
has to do with a mathematical principle that you assert is real. What
happened--did you bet on the Falcons today?  [:-)

I think we're drifting from the point of whether the use of the hyperfocal
distance is appropriate for aerial photography. I vote no because its use
cannot benefit any subject more distant than 500 feet, the minimum altitude at
which aircraft are generally allowed to fly. I say, as did someone else, tape
the focus at infinity and forget about it. If the images are not in sharp
focus, get the camera checked or learn better techniques for holding it in a
vibrating aircraft.

Mel Brown