Earl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The first one looks much closer to 1971. I have
> one pretty close to it.
> [attachment 52374 492Chama8.71.JPG]
>
> the 482 behind it.
> [attachment 52375 482Chama8.71.JPG]
>
> Lastly, the freshly painted 487, who just sneaks
> into the shot.
> [attachment 52376 487-Chama8.71.JPG]
It's possible since I didn't develop a good way to keep tract for a few years. The early ones I went by the Kodak stamp on the slide. I'll check that one. JP