Double dash has long been the way to clearly indicate in plain ASCII text an em dash as distinct from a simple hyphen. So I think the author here is here emphatically reclaiming the use of the em dash while pointedly not using the Unicode character so beloved by LLMs.
Years back I was an intern in a bio lab whose ultracentrifuge achieved spin rates similar to a turbopump. On its titanium head was a bar code used to regulate the speed via a beam of light. Unfortunately the manufacturer issued some with the wrong bar code, causing them to overspin and, at one lab, undergo "rapid unexpected disassembly", sending chunks of flying titanium through concrete walls. Fortunately it was at night and no-one was hurt, but the salespeople travelled out to every customer site the next day to implement the product recall.
Can anyone tell whether these exposures occurred through the camera lens (from fallout particles in the sky of the depicted scenes) or in post- (or pre-) exposure handling of the film from hot dust carried by the photographer?
There's no reason they would preferentially travel through the lens and hit the current frame because most of the camera and film housing is about as transparent to gamma radiation as glass. Or maybe more transparent, because glass lenses in pro cameras tend to be rather bulky.
So this just happened somewhere between arrival to and departure from the zone.
They are not part of the image of the scene. They wouldn't be focused by the optics.
The optics would just be a slight attenuation much like the rest of the camera housing, film reel, operator, etc. So really a summation of all the exposure types you can imagine.
At least here in Brooklyn a significant minority (a third?) are purchased outright, as that gives the best long term return if you can afford the initial investment, and it simplifies a later house sale (see thread above). I think some of the tax incentives only apply in that case too.
reply