9/11 - Flight 175

[Ian Brockwell]

"PPP" (Penetrating Photographic Process) has almost unlimited possibilities. However, because of the time it takes to enlarge photographs and the expense involved, the inventor would be looking for donations to help with the cost.

But before asking for your donations, the inventor of "PPP" needs to know what areas would interest you the most!

Please vote using the poll to give us some ideas. You can also show your support by sending us an email saying "I would like to see PPP used on "XXXXXXX" and would be willing to donate $XXX to help with the costs" or become a member of the board and post a message to that effect. Please do not send any money at this time, we are simply trying to judge the potential interest for this service.

Many thanks.

You can also ask for the inventors help by requesting an estimate from him directly (for a special project) at: ppp5796@yahoo.com

[Sharpshooter]

Penetrating Photographic Process does seem an incredible new technique, but what other evidence have you, Ian, seen that gives you so much confidence in its authenticity?

If the new PPP is so costly and time consuming, then why hasn't the inventor patented his new technique, and licensed it to the likes of Kodak?

That way the technique will have every possibilty of being fully developed to its full potential ,and also earns the inventor a nice nest egg.
If there is a concern that the big firms will be reluctant to use PPP on contraversial photos, then the revenues obtained by licensing PPP would more than cover any costs the inventor might incur if he/she decides to carry out their own projects.

[Ian Brockwell]

Hello Sharpshooter, Welcome to the Board.

Penetrating Photographic Process does seem an incredible new technique, but what other evidence have you

The image below is an enlargement of a grain of pepper. The first image you see has already been enlarged 11 times to make it more visible to the eye. This was done from a photograph, not from actually looking at the object in real life (as you would need to do to obtain this detail with a microscope):

If the new PPP is so costly and time consuming, then why hasn't the inventor patented his new technique, and licensed it to the likes of Kodak?

That's a fair question and I have suggested much the same to the inventor, but he appears to want to remain in control of his invention and follow his own course (at the moment). I would have to agree that selling the idea to a "big" company (or even the government) would produce a very nice "nest egg" and he would get to see the idea developed.

Unfortunately, this is not my invention and the creator of it must decide to do what he feels is best. I have found from experience that quite often people who come up with great ideas, don't always follow the route the rest of us might take, you could say "Inventors move in mysterious ways!"