> On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 14:25:18 -0500, retrowavelength
> <retrowavelength@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 12:52:03 -0500, retrowavelength
>>> <retrowavelength@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> begin 644 35.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> Attachment decoded: 35.jpg
>>>>> `
>>>>> end
>>>>
>>>>I think that's 3S vs 35.
>>>
>>> That's how I read it too.
>>>
>>>> She's also in set 3Y & 45-13. The name
>>>> "lois" in
>>>>the attachments is (I think) almost certainly the invention of the
>>>>photo customer who assembled them into his photo album. But I COULD
>>>>be wrong!
>>>
>>> I looked and looked but can't see lois anywhere on those.
>>> Were you referring to the index that says "Every bit of me
>>> is bare" at the bottom?
>>
>>Yes, that was what I was referring to. My guess was that whoever was
>>pasting up the photo album page may have just made up a name to go
>>with the pictures. Though I admit there may be a chance that person
>>got the name from the photographer when they bought the photos.
>
> Another little mystery to keep us occupied :)
>
> RR
>
Yep. I looked at every Lois model I had on file just in case.
--rwl
|
|
')){kind=link}