Littman 45`s now from China?

[william_littman]

Mr. Flannigan you re joking right?

you say:

"Dean Jones brings up this oddball fake EBay auction using your products name, and you attack him. "

anyone reading his post written at jun 05, 2006; 07:16 a.m can see that the mention of the fake auction was used as an excuse to then engage in defamation of my business .

 

"It seems that everything about the L45`s is weird at the moment.......either we have 'The Real Deal' that doesn't sell, or the 'Littman Copy, only Cheaper', that does, but with an inaccurate finder that allows only focusing with a groundglass, to a mysterious 'Rare Earth' lens that boasts adjustable 'Bokeh'! The current fake listing from China only puts the icing on the cake. Are we to see Chinese knockoffs of a Littman?"

you saying that is free publicity is like saying that someone is the father of the internet and I am afraid that the admissions by these people regarding tech improvements over the last few months and those made earlier fully eliminates any chance of them claiming obviousness or due diligence.

 

If you consider what he says after mentioning the fake auction as free publicity that is hipocrecy.

 

His mention of the fake auction reminds of those rare firemen who start fires to then put them out and take credit for them; if he intended to help he could have notified us so that any damage could be prevented but he uses the instance as means to justify his interference.

 

Anyone can see that.

 

as far as Someone insisting that it is not their fault that people ask him to repair my product is not telling the truth as is the case with everything he writes

 

On eBay he started the following auction the title was defamatory LITTMAN 45 SINGLE Par Pez Hazard Opurt REPAIR JOB !!!!!)

he then says that You bought the hype and you're going to need it fixed. Item number: 7560846332

 

 

he proceeded to defamation of our name and product

 

 

 

he insists that you ship him the camera, and he'll inspect it for things like the lens, the back, and then he insists that pretty much everything else will have to be discarded. , he did that yet again in a different auction.

 

I don't believe a word this person says and no one does because everything he has said so far has not been true and proven to be the case by his own pen.

 

He insists it is not his fault people ask him to repair my products after admitting he Joined PN for the purpose of fulfilling threats to resort to defamation which he summarized as " stay away from me because I can SURE use the publicity " then years after when he was made to admit that all of the defamation was false he explained it as " WE are trying to stop him or at least keep him busy" . stop him is represented by the admission of intention earlier today to impede all my sales and keep me busy by the ensuing lies which he then proceeds to admit finding them cute. keeping me busy with what is something I don't need to deal with as it prevents me from working

and as always he then insists I'm an amateur . they push you they make you trip and then they say its your fault

 

 

Amateur comes from the word Aimer+ to love and amateur is "un qi aime" one who loves and it is the case I love what I do and my clients insist it shows .

 

Any insistence that any of these interferences would be publicity in good faith is a bad joke

 

By this time the entire LF community is aware that we have gone thru these same discussions over and over and I feel a certain way and others feel differently.

 

The point is whatever the case may be we need not agree on a single issue before these people are obligated to cease using these forums for solicitation.

 

That was the case from day one.

 

 

 

Mr. Ortega the fact is that you suggest that when these disruption are left unchallenged then they would do less harm.

 

I do not believe that more harm is possible than finding a situation where businesses are allowed to push their products and advertise their products directly on forums .

 

Al of what you have read in forums stems from these instigations . as a matter of fact prior to the threads in 2003 the tone was quite different and users were left to ask questions about the product and while I could have benefited financially I did not come to the threads to answer questions at a point . was I entitled? NO .

 

That would have been unfair to everyone making something or selling something.

 

If you feel that is incoherent then you and I think differently.

 

I have good customers who readily understand the purpose of my product or move to find the answers they seek and not here because whet we have here are businesses peddling their stuff while insisting

that the most qualified that have embraced my product are not qualified at all, when confronted with the tech issues they say I am an ogre and besides that all tech aspects are dismissed as smoke and mirrors.

 

You say you may have bought my camera but expected things would have been different.

 

So do I. "

 

At this point and after this long I have a pretty good Idea who will buy my product and personally I am not interested in doing business from those who condone the conflict of interest of solicitation by business on threads reserved for users only as these people have admittedly instigated the public against me using lies.

 

If you feel that is incoherent that is fine. I feel I shouldn't have had to do any ramblings because by the sites policies all of this interferences against me are forbidden.

 

These people are not the only buisness who could use publicity but appear to be the only buisnesses resorting to defamation to achieve it and appear to be the only ones allowed to do so, they admit that they cant help themselves and I am certain they cant after so long.

 

the pattern is consistent they start a thread and if confronted with the conflict of interest then they move to start a second one , a few wont mind as they do not consider conflict of interest to be the biggest impediment standing on the way to any truth and as I explained earlier I am convinced that those few are not my marketplace anyway. My only question is how come the site allows it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[camera_conjurer]

<A HREF="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=574573"> My Polaroid 110B's

have a sophisticated Low Profile back which I designed and build myself. </A><p>Along

with a <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/photo/10007448"> modern hot

shoe, </A> which you can't even ATTEMPT to provide.<p>Not only that, but I told you back

in 2003, that <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/photo/1750929"> I've

been converting Polaroid 110's to 4x5 since 1980, </A> which would make your patent

invalid.

[vivek iyer]

Michael, Is this dual similar to the ones that run on the Leica forum or different?

 

Just wondering.

 

I am sorry I really did not read through the pages of posts here. So, my excuses in advance if it is an important discussion pertinent to large format photography.

[william_littman]

Mr. Vivek; I know you did not address me with your question and on threads which are free of leverages I would consider that answering it would not be polite ; but the fact is valid and respectable members have their hands tied in these matters somewhat because these peoples instigation has proceeded in a way that any expectancy that they should behave as everyone else is expected is met with such force and abuse that nobody dares confront them .

 

they will not let anyone have the last word on threads unless it helps their pitch, if anyone questions their actions they ask you what is wrong with you? this is great entertainment.and they keep it up until anyone with any common sense is smart enough to abstain from saying anything against their sales pitch. under such arrangement nothing is truly pertinent because nothing is ever true.

 

I believe as many have stated elsewhere that these connivances not only interfere with what is pertinent but with assurances that all threads targeted will end in their favors or they will just have to call the next and the next and the next until it does is proof that the outcome of these discussions is rigged or predetermined ,

 

People like you are not advertising products or services for sale in your posts all threads are limited to people like you as oer the sites policies . If the leica forum would get duels due to diversity of opinions then that is life. Different people think differently and express themselves in different ways and as far as I'm concerned that is the reason for the first amendment and what would justify users participating in forums in search for the truth.

 

Solicitation is forbidden whether the question is pertinent or impertinent, whether you have to have the answer as of yesterday or you have a year to research it.

 

what is to follow? some members will now get to have a buy it now feature right next to their names so when they

advertise a product they can close the sale right there?

 

I mean why cant everyone just pull out all the gear they don't need out of their closets and dump it on any thread they please or better still start a thread discrediting their competition and then say that by the way they actually have that on sale and proceed to advertise it.

 

Is everyone richer than these people, is anyone less entitled to resort to the same? but the biggest question is why does everyone believe they should abide by the rules when everyone could use a few extra dollars and condone that these guys use the site as if it were their own commercial website .

 

As stated earlier this picture of a 110b and a user showing the front of a camera was taken in the 60s and is part of the camera manual. the picture presented by this person shows no more than the fact that he was once in the same room with a Polaroid camera and is not prior art as it does not show what was done to the back of the camera.

 

Furthermore when this person first decided to offer his product for sale on eBay he went on to post an image of the back of the camera and went on to explain in detail what it is that he claimed to have done previously and how and delimiting precisely what that was by assuring that he had never modified the camera differently.

 

Should he have valid prior art he would be limited to making the modification exactly in the same manner as he insists he had done previously. doing any variation from the image presented immediately exposes the buyer to liability as he has already delimited what he is entitled to do.if and only if he has prior art that is determined to be so.

 

the reason businesses are forbidden from advertising products or services is because if it is allowed that is when you get the least chance to learn the truth.

 

The truth is that if he had the prior art he insists that he does one of my patent claims could be limited in scope as to include what he did. nothing else would be allowed and in no other configuration.

 

 

 

These people don't care !

 

Maybe some of you could make money by advertising your photography services on the threads, why dont you? because it is not cool. everyone should be able to live by the same rules.

 

To prove this point I announced a photography gallery showcasing images and inviting any user owner borrower or renter to participate and it did not last a day; the moderator removed it on the basis that it was found to be commercial in nature? .

 

after which I say it would not matter whether some dont mind if these instances are allowed to persist they amount to interferances which are knowingly allowed and facilitated to a few in detriment of the rest .

[vivek iyer]

I am sorry to see this folks. I hope, you (Dean, William and others) will resolve it or come to some understanding outside of p.net.

 

At the least, I am somewhat informed now to stay clear. For that I thank Mr.Littman.

 

(my better half is an IP lawyer)

[w_t1]

I can't imagine having the time or desire to write over 29,000 characters comprising over 6,500 words on ANY topic in this kind of a forum. I probably don't write that volume in a month of emails, including work emails....

 

 

Was it Mark Twain that said something like "better to keep your mouth shut and let people wonder if you are a fool than to open it and confirm that you are..."

[razzledog]

Vivek, don't worry about it....this buffoonery has been going on for years. A certain character fits this description extremely well, (perhaps this is a new marketing ploy we don`t yet understand?). The fellow is his own worst enemy, hence my suggestion that he could employ the Chinese, they are far more courteous and nowhere near as thickheaded.

[mharris]

"The people who got to review my camera include some of the most recognized connoisseurs on classic cameras and they were convinced my camera was absolutely novel."

 

A Pez Despenser is novel, that doesn't mean I'm gonna try and make a camera out of it.

[william_littman]

Well then don't use that dispenser as Jones insists he has determined what the best way is: Mr. Jones told all of Photo.net on August of 2005 . " my own thoughts on the best way to go about converting a 110B' ." attach the Graflok/Toyo back to the packfilm holder`s rear door after cutting a suitable sized hole in it." and the rest of the steps , he admits the best way is My way even if he then claims

these suggestions are all my own IP and reflect my own thoughts on the best way to go about converting a 110B"

 

What I should have said is""The people who got to review my camera include some of the most recognized connoisseurs on classic cameras and they were convinced my camera was absolutely novel.. And added " Mr. Jones proved it was novel after seeing the completed product made a few years before and insisting to have come up with the idea 4 years after the fact as a result of having examined my product and adding that in his opinion; that was the best way to go about it.

[william_littman]

Well it seems Mr. Schwartz has had a lucid moment! for the second time It wouldn't take anyone else this long to come to the realization that if you lie about everything ; admit to doing so with the intention of causing harm and tell people you think that's funny and they still don't laugh then all you can do is then shrug your shoulders and tell jokes to make up for it; but I can remind him of his other lucid moment again contadicting what he writes in the forums "A few people have written to me about the price of the Littman 45 being too high. I really don't like to hear that. I have told them that, the Littman 45 is a high quality camera and worth EVERY CENT he charges for them and more. Look into the Littman 45 if you want the best camera you can get." of course it doesn't matter what he writes in the threads because besides the few who are into ax grinding everyone else hopes the threads would be free of these peddlers and their baggage.

[w_t1]

"A few people have written to me about the price of the Littman 45 being too high. I really don't like to hear that"

 

I'm not sure why you'd be offended by potential customers complaining about the price. I hear stuff all the time from my employer, my wife, my kids, my doctor, etc. that I don't want to hear. If you're not selling the number of cameras that you think you should, then perhaps your price is too high. Heck, I sure wish Mercedes cost the same as Chevrolet...but I bet Mercedes company wouldnt take it personally or complain if i bitched about the price, which I'm sure happens all the time.

 

 

Noah, those are classic pics of you in your workshops over various years.

[w_t1]

woops i made a mistake, I see the complaint about the price is attributed to Noah....oh well, nothing i write here matters anyway....back to work

[camera_conjurer]

I don't have anything to do with that quote. <p> I don't even understand the context of it.

[william_littman]

" HA! I taunt you " yes we can all see that and we are tired of it .He threatened to and joined PN to do so and you are still doing it.

 

"I come off really good in that thread...." overt preoccupation with coming out good which has also been expressed as his determination to " not letting others have the last word on threads"translates into ensuing compulsive lying .If this person feels he comes off really good by lying and needs to proceed that way and is happy about it that is his choice. sounds "needy" but to each its own.

 

he was given plenty of opportunities to submit prior art even after patent issue as I kept explaining to him in these threads that I contacted him to ask for prior art not because of his rights but because of everyone else's and then he lied insisting he had submitted it and then admitted it was because he was upset feeling that someone stole his idea which he later referred to as having seen such idea for the first time when someone walked into his workplace with one which was completed.

 

then came here to say it was because he did not know who I was but later admitted that someone had shown him a magazine with an article on my product, had visited my website and even saw someone using one on the streets.

 

If he wanted to come off really good and consider the rest of you he would have left such pettiness aside, the lies and hang-ups and worked towards providing me or my attorneys with what is required. then after that I did not hold patent issue date as final and waited for years but now I over him and this situation in a big way.

 

But in any event the fact is that patent or no patent neither of us are supposed to use the forums to promote or advertise products or services..I'm going to deal with patent issues in court and not in opinion alley. because these issues cannot be resolved by taunting and the " HA! I taunt you " coupled with the refusal to cooperate and submit prior art goes to great length to tell me that no prior art exists.

 

 

My position is that every business has issues with other businesses and If they are not entitled to litter the threads with this sort of stuff to advertise products and services by posing as having an interest in finding "resolutions". much less to rattle the cage some more if they are reminded to abstain from solicitation.

 

There is no doubt in anyone's mind as to what to expect from these people who admit to have ambushed these podiums for business purposes using justifications when no justification is offered to anyone.

 

Mr. Jones seems to believe he is the spokesperson for our company for Photo.net. he isn't and to summarize that bit he insisted to have obtained a sample of our product last year and while boasting experience as to question my research declared to be holding our camera but unfortunately having no instructions on how to build one? starting numerous threads directly or thru admitted instigation to intercept our progress and I would like to take this opportunity to say that should we choose to make any sort of announcement in this website we shall proceed to do so directly . as it has been our choice to make our announcements outside of the forums we find it is inappropriate malicious and misleading that competitors assume such roles as a means of interference.

 

But this taunting is not healthy or conducive for photography , the truth is pushed farther and farther when partisanship is to the point that participants are disappointed that the technical truths are found because it may benefit their team's score, that is why I am glad my clients and supporters have abstained because there can be no winners here, everyone looses, to these people it is all about coming out really good while the public is used as pawn and that is why I'm glad my clients and supporters have gone to do their thing rather than get sucked into this. If I have had to weather the storm on my own and made a lot of typos and have appeared stressed it is because they insist that they are to set up shop and hang up the sign or they will call the next one when their shift is over,

 

Regarding secrecy;Few would bother informing customers that they utilize a method of triangulation in order to make determinations or findings and yesterday we were all reminded that it has been used for 2200 years.

 

You can all notice that those who challenge my research insisted such a thing would not be required and dismissed / discredited as gibberish while they speak of findings and determinations as to challenge mine, well the fact is that regarding these issues no findings or determinations can exist without the utilization of the triangulation. the only thing that can exist is fiddling and a range of expectation by trial and error and some experience but experience without precise findings is too inaccurate as to be considered as a base for improvements to the point that every time you use that route you have to keep at it until something happens and then you cannot establish a base for comparison. much like when going to an optometrist and trying different loupes until

satisfied as opposed to having a prescription that can be readily compared to other variables so that the comparison between variables allows for choices in every selection simultaneously. this may not be required to be somewhat within range but is required in order to be able to streamline function and performance beyond adjustment. insistence that would not be required, its dismissal and mockery proves that what would have been needed for determinations was never even attempted which would eliminate the right of anyone whether a competitor or individual to disrupt our work schedule which belongs to our paying clients so that they can be entertained or satisfy their curiosity but most importantly it eliminates any chance that these people could demonstrate any findings or determinations in court existed beyond results by fiddling that would justify their disruption of our work schedule and interference with our ability to sell our product with assurances of things that were not required which were found present in structures obtained and which they have admitted was the case . or when Jones obtained my product and went on to insist that the right cam installed could not work and was puzzled by the fact it was there. I cannot accept confrontation and disruption be permitted after such instances because taunting and mockery is not justified after matters are demonstrated people would normally cease but instead that translates into further and further rallies.

 

There is no secrecy just a conviction that this is a no win situation in every regard therefore I expect this site is well informed of the way these people have proceeded and that they have no intention of ceasing the solicitation and while what users write and do may be their responsibility. the site makes no provision or exemption to use the forums for solicitation by anyone, and is expected to move responsively to correct this

 

.

[william_littman]

He has nothing to do with that quote except he wrote it and I agree it doesnt matter . give it a rest.

[razzledog]

"The people who got to review my camera include some of the most recognized connoisseurs on classic cameras and they were convinced my camera was absolutely novel" Does this mean they considered it to be a joke?

Why does it matter so much that these 'people' have to be 'connoissers' or 'rich and famous'?

I`m quite happy for anyone to use my cameras, no matter who they are.

This persistant name dropping to try and impress has become a bore. What about some unknown with talent?

Why the continual social climb? So far, all I`ve seen is ill framed, contrived and out of focus shots a 'Lens Baby' would easily put to shame.

As for having your 'Art Department' assess the works of participants in a 'one day lens test' to see if they fit the criteria necessary to qualify, as well as retain the rights to their works for your future reference, well that just takes the cake.

[diwan_bhathal]

It is all this GIBBERISH regarding all these findings (fiddlings) that confuses everyone.

 

Will it be possible to know sometime what QUADRANGULATION means? We know what triangulation is, but we are all at a loss when he hear this quadrangulation?

 

What are all these "variables", are they negative distances or patented variables? The photographic community wants to know what is "novel" about the whole thing. How are these variables compared and how are the choices made?( secret hint: assure that they are not required within range).

 

The basis for the DOF has been posted in the beginning of this thread. From there, one can determine the variables, they are all related to each other and the basis for the formula is nothing more and nothing less than plain triangulation. This system works still after 2200 years.

 

Now, if one fiddles with all of this, and makes a choice within range, which therefore streamlines function, then it is obvious that it eliminates any chance that some people can demonstrate any findings. This is the proof that synergy is at work here.

 

In short, and to make things clear: it is a very BLURRY situation.

 

What I see is more and more GIBBERISH and DRIBBLE and excuses to deflect the main question. And furthermore, these "conoisseurs" must be all going blind, or be in need of prescription glasses.

 

I may state that any camera that cannot demonstrate focus is commonly considered to be a TOY CAMERA. We all have seen plenty of examples of that, some of which are quite successful.

 

Will we ever get an independent assessment as how good/bad that camera is? All I see is that the camera needs repair and adjustment. Repair what? Adjust what? The RF, the infinity stop? The hand strap? Further fine tuning of the red button for ergonomics?

 

I do not have to repair my cameras, only lemons need constant repairs. But if they are built to be inherently blurry, with the focus behind the photographer, then this is another story. Not even the magic of quadrangulation or synergy can fix that. Is this camera totally crosseyed to attain the claimed parallax correction? Does it need to have more smoke added and the mirrors cleaned?

 

The only results that we have been shown are, as stated previously, ...are worse than a LENSBABY.

[camera_conjurer]

Why would I write, "A few people have written to me about the price of the Littman 45 being

too high. I really don't like to hear that" ?<p>Could someone explain me that?<p>Maybe I'm

forgetting something.<p>And what does that have to do with anything, anyway ?

[william_littman]

What is a joke is that you would suppress the opinions of those who have credentials and accomplishments including the reviews, impede the chance of one of your clients in journalism and dare say it would be you who would be writing the article on the subject. Hierarchy is accepted throughout and you seem to resent it while expect it in your case but I just don't care what the case may be call anything whatever you like and do whatever you like I have paid attention to your opinions and considered them and after you told me"

oct 13, 2003; 06:05 a.m As it was I who instigated this discussion, I feel that I should have a word in closure

 

It is my opinion that a legal Patent should be respected. It also serves as a means of clarification in regard to what can and can`t be offered as an alternative to the modification of the Polaroid camera.The input provided by William Littman in this matter must be considered as words only. such posting has an active role in self regulation.

 

You have no regard for the value of the opinions of the most accomplished, my clients or mine so considering that and that you do not honor what you wrote was your own opinion then all I expect is that this site will not allow the solicitation. the rest will be dealt with in court.

 

Thank you

[dan_fromm2]

Moderators, will you please cancel this thread and ban the more vocal participants?

 

Mr. Littman is raving. That's unfortunate.

 

The people taunting him and inflaming his emotions are behaving like a pack of schoolyard bullies. They're all behaving disgracefully and should be ashamed of themselves.

 

I don't know whether Mr. Littman is capable of controlling himself. Based on their posts in other threads, the people pelting him, as it were, with dead fish and rotten vegetables are fully in control of themselves. Their behavior is shameful.

[helenbach]

Dan,

 

On the other hand, it would be a shame to lose the contributions from helpful people because of the ravings of an unhelpful person.

 

Best,

Helen

[camera_conjurer]

Mr. Fromm, I'm afraid you have this all backwards.<p>Mr. Litman has been making

outrageous claims against all of us for years, harassing us and our customers and making

outrageous claims for his cameras.<p>His business practices are, at the very least,

'questionable'.<p>I'm no 'bully', nor am I a peddler. <p>I just make tools for artists.

[william_littman]

Mr. Fromm is correct this is shameful and I am partly to blame as having no choice but to defend my product from accusations of gibberish instigated here.

 

 

 

When there is conflict of interest the truth is hindered by the contributions of those who benefit from them.

 

Someone would get offended if they are called as a store clerk when they are the manager showing they value hierarchy yet that someone would also reffer to someone considered as an accomplished photographer and having a product in high regard and have issues regarding that hierarchy due to hang- ups or whatever it may be as to have used words as " apparently well known and respected" to introduce his instigation against me and it gets too complicated partisan and unhealthy and hypocrisy.

 

Attributing fault on any given issue does not help the conflict of interest issue regardless.

 

Whatever help can be obtained in exchange for support and rallies can be compared to votes in exchange for cash and what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

When my clients preffered my product they were labeled as bribed minions assuring that nobody could prefer it otherwise and when someone considers that getting answers at a click of a mouse by those allowed to solicit invites this type of hierarchy

situation.

 

Answering Mr. Bhatal's question because if not Ill never get any sleep

Quadrangulation is the use of triangulation plus an additional angle as a means to alter one of the three variables in the main triangle in such way as to improve performance after the cam expected performance cannot be improved further.

 

A cam is like a prescription for glasses or a key to a lock only one is the best but even at that once that is achieved there is an improvement that can be obtained by the altering of the angles so that while the cam retains the properties interpreting the performance of the actual lens design the angles can be used to improve the performance of the beam in relationship to the cam in question.

 

Your mention that a fixed cam pre stamped and invariable for the wrong focal length would be better because it doesn't slip would be like saying that you would rather have a brass key for the wrong lock than one made out of aluminum with the right combination because the second one would brake true so I solved the slippage issue.

 

In the future when I am allowed to explain the quadrangulation better I will do so on my site. I don't think this is a question of who may be at fault which will be resolved somewhere else otherwise on top of everything it turns into a buy one because this other guy isguy is a ...that or the other.

[razzledog]

Dan, I would say that if you had you endured all the threats, intimidation and general nuisance this fellow has given us, (including the threatening phone calls and emails to buyers of our products), you would be of an entirely different opinion.

This fellow could be well described as a tyrant of the first order, therefore the strong reaction.

It should come as no surprise that these threads arise on a regular basis.

When the Ogre realises he has been exposed, or better yet turns his attention to something more suited to his nature, (certainly nothing creative comes to mind), perhaps all the dissent will cease.

We did not instigate ANY of this behaviour and most will agree it makes for a good laugh once in a while.

[helenbach]

"Will it be possible to know sometime what QUADRANGULATION means?"

 

You probably know this Diwan, but here goes anyway:

 

It already had at least one meaning long before WL used the term. Just as triangulation does not refer to the use of three angles, but to the use of triangles, quadrangulation does not refer to the use of four angles but to the use of quadrangles. That's one current use in the outside world anyway - the prior art, you might say. WL's use may be different: that's up to him to explain, and I look forward to reading that.

 

Triangulation can be used to define points in three-dimensional space. Fully determinate. No ambiguity, no redundancy.

 

Quadrangulation, on the other hand, may be used when less accuracy is required, when you don't need determinacy. You don't mind a bit of slop if it reduces the computational effort. A quadrangle is not rigid like a triangle. That's why quadrangulation isn't the big thing that triangulation is. Because triangulation doesn't use three angles, it uses triangles. There is an important conceptual difference.

 

Best,

Helen