|
新進會員
| 81) 2003/06/15 00:25  
re:笨超 quote:
超人:
你質疑162既冇廠方公佈數字,而話人家欺騙,
咁你一定有你既廠方資料同數字,先會咁口硬
話人地欺騙同愚弄大家！
你既邏輯思維唔得, 同你ｄ英文一樣!
佢冇同我有咩關係! 我論點係「無」呢
個所講標準呀!
quote:
需然162長篇大論拒既見解,但起碼拒有做到核心問題,
兼詳盡.我也希望你所搵既料更加有說服力,以示162話
你誹謗,完全係誤會。
核心問題你仲未明! 卵講62吋多ｄｄ, 佢取笑我之餘
拿出一個「標準」, 而呢個標準經多反番追問
都係冇任何支持証據, 我用「fool」來形容佢呢個行為, 因
為佢講極都仲係無有力証明支持番個所謂標準,
之後佢就講自己有幾叻又做過乜, 但連個四筒片係咩牌子咩
影號都冇講到. 更重要係「標準」一詞你同佢好似唔明係咩
黎, 無錯, A廠可以有A廠既標準, B廠同貨但又有B標準, 一
樣冇問題. 係咩情況出現相同標準呢? 就例如VHS帶, 由JVC
及NATIONAL創立, 要帶著VHS LABEL就要用VHS標準, 這情況
一如CD、電池的UM-SIZE、天文台手錶等等, 通通都要付合某
專利註冊的嚴緊標準, 其標準已包括生產及操作誤差. 我認
為無劃一標準也不是隨便說, 你大可以搵135-36卷裝菲林有
沒有任何專利註冊, 我找了很久也找不到, 只有DX及DXn是有
註冊標準. 加上我測量的菲林有出現非64" +/-0.2"的長度,
更加加強本人對那個所謂「標準」認庶是順口開河而已.
quote:
135菲林規格.公式.長度係由柯達訂出.正確答案唔難,
難在呢鑊輸得好唔好睇,大家有冇個好既下台楷,免致
手扎上朋友討論氣紛(氣焰熏天),這對大家上手扎學野
同吹水係唔好現像,公道自在人心,口講口陪,夜籣人靜,
懾高枕頭,想下係過唔道自己果關,希望兩位三思！
135菲林來由或許是由KODAK發展或發明, 但菲林筒的形
式就似乎是由LEICA或某德國公司而來, 135-36的菲林長
度由KODAK訂立? 你又有咩証明呀??
我講錯會道歉, 人難免一錯或再錯, 連道歉的氣量都冇,
大概我係TELECOMM玩唔到十幾年咁耐. 本人無須甚麼下台
階, 手扎或其他網頁都係見字不見人, 好多人玩唔掂改名
或潛水就已經唔使下台. 而網上言論從來都不可盡信, 所
以我才不停網查以求最準確答案. 再三思想早就做左, 起
碼唔會囉Ｄ無法公開認同的事物出來當標準.
|
新進會員
| 82) 2003/06/15 00:39
If any one are interested in the ISO standard of 135 film, you can try to buy the pdf document in the following official links of www.iso.org It did not mention any standard total lenth of a roll of film, It just define dimention of various frame that under 135 film. 18x24, 23x24, 24x24, 24x32, 24x33, 24x36,24x56 and added 24x65 for Xpan last year, http://www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=28855&ICS1=37&ICS2=40&ICS3=20As the copyrights, I cannot quote here. However, most information are free of charge in the following links. Film format in the world. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_formatHistory of 35mm film. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/35mm_filmHistory of 135 film http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/135_filmSee ISO 1007 for 135 film. It did not mention any length standard of film. but just lenth of each film. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ISO_standards120 film (ISO 732) (It have standard total length of a roll of 120 film, but not for 135 film) http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_filmSomeone will pretend again that he do not know english. |
新進會員
| 83) 2003/06/16 20:42
24x36mm規格(Ur-Leica)
~~奧斯卡.巴納克在當時係一位機械工程師,同時亦係攝影發消友,
Leica 相機歷史就是他擔任徠茲公司研究主任開始。
當時他拍攝是要用笨重的大型相機與三腳架出外(打相),
但也沉迷於使用電影機拍攝短片,所以對於拍電影用既
35mm軟片非常熟悉,他不斷研究如何製造一部方便工具
使他能夠輕便地得到拍電影時,有個曝光參考,於是設計
一台小型相機(其實也可以話一個小暗盒),使用24x36mm
規格軟片,以作試拍之用。
奧斯卡.巴納克先生.他發現這小相機拍出來既底片放大後,
效果卻出奇滿意,輕巧.使他對這台相機愛不釋手,1914年
135mm菲林一齊由奧斯卡.巴納克開始。
~~~這些資料不是上綱搵,係到銅羅灣攝影人聚腳聊天地方,
所提供,也多謝mickey_mouse給我學到器材以外既料。~~~
|
新進會員
| 84) 2003/06/16 20:56
我量度36張裝菲林長度的照片放在這裏: http://www.pbase.com/sh162_hkg第一卷Kodak GB 200度,比64吋短了一個孔. 第二卷Fuji X-TRA 400度, 比64吋長了一個孔. 第三卷Fuji Sensia 100度,剛好64吋. 第四卷Konica Centuria 100度, 比64吋短了一個孔. 菲林不是我製造的,人人都可以買到,自己量度. ---------------------------------------------- 超人: 既然你說我講的菲林長度沒有Search Proof, 而你講的長度也不見得有Proof, 我只是問你憑什麼說我講大話? 提供錯誤資料只是錯事, 人人都有機會做錯事, 講大話卻是做壞事. 【By telling lie to fool the other】 【講大話去愚弄他人】是很嚴重的指控, 提出指控的人必須有足夠証據, 否則利益歸於被指控的人, 被指控的人無須提出任何証據, 去証明自己無犯錯. 你既然什麼都相信Proof, 那麼請問上述的指控, Proof在那裏? 上一次你說某人誹謗你, 你不是向他提出要証據的要求嗎? 你持有兩個不同標準嗎? |
新進會員
| 85) 2003/06/16 22:21
就係兩個字「規格」, 你仲未知自己衰乜, 真係好可憐!
中、英文叻既你, 唔知規格二字你識解未呢?!
我冇興趣同你玩, 扮代表「大」完人地自已爆響口冇SPEC, 你太低Ｂ...
|
新進會員
| 86) 2003/06/17 03:33
~~超人~~
我見你介紹自己由讀大學到結婚咁長盡,
我先覺得奧斯卡.巴納克35mm同你咁發揮.
如果有錯.唔關我中文差,係的大師兄番譯,
人不人鬼不鬼,拒地都話我苯,敏感.準確性
用英文最好架,側側膊唔多覺,唔係得閑個個
讀大學,今次唔係苯,係死蠢.
|
新進會員
| 87) 2003/06/17 07:27
----- 香港至*NET*超人-------
我冇興趣同你玩, 扮代表「大」完人地自已爆響口冇SPEC, 你太低Ｂ...
請您講得出，做得到。不論任何情景或理由，都不要再回答此話題。
公道自在人心。
peterthin
方法可行與否試下就知！ 以前的報館也常用這方法；在全黑之黑房內進行也可以！
問題:請問有冇人不用分裝器自捲菲林?
您己清楚回答_以前_有人不用分裝器自捲菲林。--我相信現在少或者沒有。--
超人也回答:要黑房做, 貼膠紙也是, 相當麻煩.我不是提供方法捲片，而我亦係用分裝器捲片既.
超人兄：您明明提供了不用分裝器自捲菲林要黑房做，此方法相當麻煩。并不實際。 您都提供了您係用分裝器捲片既.
兩位都回答了問題的重點。Thanks。
其它的都非重要，也都離題萬丈，絕非1分?1吋?1呎?
尊重自己。尊重他人。切勿人身功擊。 |
新進會員
| 88) 2003/06/17 09:33
RE:peterthin quote:
----- 香港至*NET*超人-------
我冇興趣同你玩, 扮代表「大」完人地自已爆響口冇SPEC, 你太低Ｂ...
請您講得出，做得到。不論任何情景或理由，都不要再回答此話題。
公道自在人心。
你 =/= 此話題.
re:笨超
我冇讀過大學, 我只是在大學工作.
再重申, 用英文唔等同側側膊, 我用既亦係中學生英文,
如果有好好讀果九年免費書, 唔會睇唔明. |
新進會員
| 89) 2003/06/17 10:44
I believe the discussion here gets serious logical problems. Someone said that there is standard length of 64 inches +- 0.2 inches for 36 frames 135 roll films. It can be translated as "<ALL> 36 frames 135 roll films are with length 64 inches +- 0.2 inches". If another one want to disprove it, he just need to find one roll of 36 frames 135 roll film that is not 64 inches +- 0.2 inches. It just likes when someone said all horses are brown, if you disagree, you just need to findd a horse that is not browm to disprove his saying. Another one said that there is no standard length fo 36 frames 135 films. If some other one wants to disprove his saying, that some other one need to do is one of the following. 1) Give a concrete proof of existance of the standard. or 2) Measure ALL 36 frames 135 roll films and prove ALL are with length 64inches +- 0.2 inches. It just likes when people said not all horse are brown, it is very difficult to disprove his statments. Someone has chosen a weak side in the discussion. In most case, ISO are more demanding than other common standards. If you want to sell products to Europe, you need to compile with ISO standard. There are two ISO definitions for films, ISO 1007 for 135 film and ISO 732 for 120 films. In ISO 732, it clearly defines the total length of the films, width of films, The total lengh of the paper, standard frame side of 645, 66,67, 68, 69, 612, 617, the spool size.......... However, in ISO 1007, there is no statement concerning the total length of a 135 roll film. I guess, the different treatment of the two ISO 732 and ISO 1007 is due to the different designs of the film advance mechanics, And actually, there are only a few global standard. ISO are mainly for Europe and a few Asia countries and Areas only. USA gets it own standards and Japan get it own standards as well. For example, 802.11b for wireless lan are with a little bit difference between USA and Europe, there are more commmunication channels in USA than in Europe. |
新進會員
| 90) 2003/06/17 18:59
所以我在完成大學工作時
``````````````````````
苯超：首先向你陪過不是.對不起.
不過你能在大學內工作己能令我刮目相看.
經此一役我更加封你做我偶像. |
新進會員
| 91) 2003/06/17 22:11
大學都要人打掃種花, 又要人執頭執尾洗所.....
不過而家要係大學做清潔都好難, 因為幾年前已經搞外判...
能在大學工作因為當時我無乜學識, 肯從低做起, 我總記得
我第一天番工就是到某房間抹台吸塵, 當時那房的高級技術
員人工兩萬, 我就三千唔夠.....
不過第一次出大學糧買左乜就唔記得, 只記得將一半比了家
用. 十一年的大學工作使我學到許多東西, 英文一日好過一
日, 亦見到很多人生百態, 當然搵到我既第一桶金, 亦係最
後一桶.
當中印象最深的是, 我這一個普通技術員, 估唔到有日有個
電腦中心既老友(senior computer officer)來訪, 有個job
求我幫手, 因為全U無人識對付某部門前人所寫的DBASE 3+...
自此, 我覺得讀書最重要唔係識字, 係張CERT.....
|
新進會員
| 92) 2003/06/21 14:27
自捲菲林長度→大學工作(實習?)→原來在大學做工……..
Off topic, 轉移話題?
|
新進會員
| 93) 2003/06/21 14:30
咁多日勒，乜你無任何証據去支持你的
5呎2吋、5呎2吋多dd、63.5吋、63.75吋咩?
我隨手取4捲不同牌子類型的菲林,
都剛好係我講既長度,
唔知點解咁「0岩」呢.
依你所言,
原來無公佈就等於無規格,
咁大量生產既產品都係無規格既,
梗係求其 Random 剪一段長度就算勒.
要知道某產品既規格,
最簡單係依廠方公佈,
但如果無廠方公佈呢?
利用「統計學」裏的方法一樣可以知道,
難為你話係大學工作十一年……….
講認叻排隊都未輪到我,
起碼個名己經講左俾大家知,
邊個自認「至叻」啦.
你道歉與否,對我一D都唔重要,
但從這件事,
可讓網友更加看清楚你,
輸打嬴要, 惡霸行徑,
真面目是要經歷事情才會揭開的.
|
新進會員
| 94) 2003/06/21 14:37
>要知道某產品既規格,
>最簡單係依廠方公佈,
>但如果無廠方公佈呢?
>利用「統計學」裏的方法一樣可以知道,
統計學?
A sample size of 4 rolls of films?
What is the population size?
What will be the error level?
How accurate will your statistics be?
How representatives your result will be?
What will be the stanard deviation?
What is the p-value of you result?
By they way, I dont believe the discussion is a statistic matter.
I really appreciate your efforts on keep arguing. However, it is better to spend those efforts on other matters. |
新進會員
| 95) 2003/06/21 15:44
要知道某產品既規格,最簡單係依廠方公佈,但如果無廠方公佈呢?
利用「統計學」裏的方法一樣可以知道
一開始就話：每隻牌子都依循同一標準，
後來又話：菲林廠方對這些規格不會向外公佈。
我相信大量生產既產品係有規格的,
不過問題係無法証明這就是你所講的標準，仲係每隻牌子都依循同一的標準。
現想搞清楚，煩請解釋一下! 你所講的所謂廠方規格，是從何而來？
是利用沖缸深度的規格？或是利用你的「統計學」方法知道的，是嗎?
就憑Kodak,Fuji,Fuji Sensia,Konica各一捲，
的「統計學」就足以知道証明每隻牌子都是依循同一標準，同一規格??
你知道各菲林廠的各種菲林單日的世界性產量有幾多?
你講得冇錯，真面目是要經歷事情才會揭開的。
惡霸行徑,輸打嬴要的可能並非別人。
|
新進會員
| 96) 2003/06/21 19:13
use 30 samples to check should be ok. |
新進會員
| 97) 2003/06/21 19:31
>use 30 samples to check should be ok.
How can you be sure that it follow normal distribution?
How about the affect of sampling methods?
How about the resulted standard deviation? Will it be much lesser than the said 0.2 inches?
one tail test? two tail test?
What will be the test power? how large will be the type I error? type II error? How accurate will it be?
Most important, statisical truth <> truth, sample <> population unless sample size = population size.
|
新進會員
| 98) 2003/06/21 21:55
>>Most important, statisical truth <> truth, sample <> population unless sample size = population
Agree...Statistics is NEVER meant to be the truth but statistics is still an useful tool to interpret the collected data
|
新進會員
| 99) 2003/06/21 22:14
>>>Most important, statisical truth <> truth, sample <> population unless sample size = population
>Agree...Statistics is NEVER meant to be the truth but statistics is still an useful tool to interpret the collected data
However, I don't see any statistical method can be done to proof the estisting of a standard.
Eventhough, all the film are 64 inches, it can just happen by chance.
It is very difficult to proof the standard is the "cause" of that "outcome" all films are 64 inches. If you study statistic, you should know what I mean.
By the way, most agfa film has very strange film length, I have many experience of taking 40 to 42 exposures with their 36frame roll films.
|
新進會員
| 100) 2003/06/21 22:16
Using more simple words
all films are 64 inches long <> there exist a standard
in statistical point of view or causal analysis point of view.
Off topic too much. sorry. |
|
|
