Hello yukkuri_kame What if there is a half an inch thick wooden Length in between Iron Angle frame & 6 mil Poly layer all around the greenhouse? Wooden length will bolted with Angle Iron & then Poly Layer will be attached to wood itself. See pic below. Hello dowlinggram, RoofTop is strong enough to support the load of the frame. It dosen't matter. Roof Top is tiled with bricks with cement in between them over a stong concrete structure.I have no need to construct benches in greenhouse. Please refer to link below: One or two pics are showing RoofTop Structure. Awaiting comments. Cheers. Here is a link that might be useful: Here, Roof Structure Shown in one or two pics.

This is a most riveting subject, and a most interesting thread. I think there is a little bit of truth in many of the posts so far and I've changed my mind on this one at least five times. The actual print inside the frame gave me the impression of a photograph because of the fine white line like old photos get when they are damaged. That being said, one can take a photo of a drawing and parts of this picture are without a doubt hand rendered including the background and that could very well be a studio backdrop. My impression at this point is that this is likely a studio portrait and that it is in essence a composite with the facial features being the true rendering off a negative and the rest a lot of touch up and very poorly executed outright embellishment. If you'd like to see an example of a turn of the century hand painted studio backdrop, I can show you a large portrait of my great-grandfather and his brother sitting in a real chair, but with a very fake staircase behind them. LOL It was not an unusual practise, clear on up to the forties and fifties for some photographers to take portraits in black and white and hand tint and retouch them in the dark room. It wasn't because of the cameras not being able to, but the studios having the equipment to develop them. So seeing 'sketch marks' doesn't prove anything but the skill of the craftsman who took and developed the portrait because you're just as likely to see the editing on a real photograph as not. I have a portrait of my g'grandmother I'm inserting here because judging by her age it would have been taken about 1918-20. It has been hand tinted, and if you look at her blouse, it has obviously been hand retouched for detail and the bottom darkened out to extend the photo as much as possible to the paper to fill it. I think this is what happened to the boy's dress......it was probably enhanced by hand and the chair by imagination and lack of artistic ability. Even poor people scrounged up the money for portraits in the old days, God knows my ancestors weren't rich people and we have them to pass along. But they certainly were special enough not to be done on a whim. One portrait my g'parents had taken in the twenties was of my little aunt who was expected to die at birth, but lived until two years. So, they coughed up the money, even with ten kids, to have a portrait taken of her. I'm no expert and I'm not pretending to be but before I'd blow this one off as a fake, I'd have it checked out. Regardless of how it pans out, and even if it turns out to be a Cracker Barrel nostalgia shot..........it's a Jim Dandy and worth hanging on a wall just to see the mug on that kid.

Laura, the plain tile is from Lea Ceramiche, 'Masterplan' collection, 'Avorio' shade, 'Lappato' finish ... http://www.ceramichelea.it/acm-on-line/en/Home/products/collections/cardCatmasterplan.33.1.20.2.html The accent glass mosaic is from Casamood, 'Vetro' collection, 'Metalico Oro' shade ... http://www.casamood.com/home.asp?lang=_eng The tile with the romantic scenes is from Novoceram, a French manufacturer which does awesome 'ceramic wallpapers' ... http://www.novoceram.fr/art.jsp?&serieid=97&language=en I do feel that the combination of a diagonal pattern and a staggered pattern would be too much, but it's only my opinion and it's difficult to say without seeing your room.

I can't quite see why a computer can't extrapolate and "fill in the dots" to blow up low res picture fairly accurately. You can fill in the dots and enlarge a photo as long as you have enough original information to begin with. When we view a photo we hold it or stand back a distance that is relative to the photo's size. As the photo gets bigger we keep backing up. As we back up the requirement for fine detail in the photo goes down (our eye sight doesn't improve as we back up). Therefore there should be a "content threshold" for photos so that we can expect to enlarge them to whatever size and they'll still look good. For digital cameras that content threshold is between 5 and 6 megapixels. 3 and 4 megapixel photos will eventaully collapse but they're close enough to the threshold that they will hang in there for a long time. I've made 16x20 inch prints from 3 meagpixel photos that looked great. Someone with "photographer's disease" could walk up to a 16x20 print from a 3 megapixel file, stick their nose in it, and claim, "it's not sharp." They need help. There are two high end competing algorithms used to interpolate up the content of a digital image. Photoshop uses the bicubic interpolation algorithm and Genuine Fractals uses a fractal interpolation algorithm. The photos below are big, but necessary so you can see. I took an image from an 8 meagpixel camera and reduced it's content to 1.6 megapixel and .5 megapixel equivalents. Then I used Photoshop (PS) and Genuine Fractals to interpolate those photos back to the resolution of the original. The 1.6 megapixel file was enlarged over 200% to get back to the 8 megapixel original res. GF did an amazing job and there's no way you'd see a differenece in an 8x10 print between the original and the 1.6 megapixel file -- a little sharpening applied to the interpolated 1.6 megapixel file and it's going to look great. .5 megapixels is just too little information to work with. Joe has made this point a few times as I recall and he's right: Given average amateur usage (4x6 prints with occasional enlargements to 8x10), a quality 3 megapixel camera and good software will do the job. At 6 megapixel you've reached content threshold so that with the right software your photo can be enlarged to highway billboard size and look good. Why an 8 to 10 megapixel camera? -- the freedom to crop the image down and still have content threshold.