a discussion I had with Justin, a few months ago

 > This pic looks out of balance to me. First, the

> paddle looks way too long and hard to control to be
> used over the lap. If the kid was bending over
> something further away, the grandpa could adjust the
> distance for max force & leverage. Here he might be
> holding it so the strikes would be closer to the
> handle when they would be better striking closer to
> the end of the paddle.

Yes you're right. It's definitely possible to use a paddle that long over the lap. And instead of swatting the bottom with the part of the paddle close to the handle, grandpa could instead have his elbow further back so that the end part of the paddle can still connect. But, either way of doing it, ends up giving less hard of a swat than that size of paddle is capable of.

So of course it is likely that reason for the size of paddle and the position and the kid not losing their undies for the paddling. Is that it's all staged for a movie.

> I got an over the lap belting earlier this year by
> my dad at a friends house and it was a noticeable
> difference from when I get it at home bending over my
> bed. I think my dad only did it over his lap was
> because my co-conspirator got his over his dad's lap.

Interesting! I agree that over the knee is not the most effective position for a belt spanking. There are several belt spanking pics that are over the knee. Including the scene in the famous "Large Field Array" artwork by Keith Tyson. That one was based on his own experiences I think. Also the one from the Polish government anti-spanking video that we had as a forum pic last month.

> No, I'm not into physics, my hobby is electronics

Ahaha I find physics interesting and had to study it at school every year until a few months ago. They also taught us basic electronics in physics lessons.

I think the most relevant topic we were taught in physics was called "Moments and Levers". That explains why a swat with the part of the paddle furthest from the handle is most powerful. Although, it doesn't explain why the "sweet spot" for a bat or paddle is slightly closer to the handle than that. Maybe it's because the extreme end of the implement has slightly less kinetic energy even though it has more speed?

I asked a year or two ago on this forum. Why it is that. If a longer cane or yardstick or paddle (like, 3 feet - 1 metre long) is more effective than a shorter one. Because of the higher velocity nearer to the far end. Then why wouldn't people who wanted maximum effect, use a cane or yardstick or paddle that was even longer, or crazily long? Like 6 feet - nearly 2 metres.

(I guess that would be a double yardstick instead of being a yardstick, but I'm sure you can buy them.)

Do you solder things when you do electronics? What kind of things do you do with electronics?

Paul wrote:

> I thought the same thing Justin, it's an awkward position
> for that, the pic looks very high quality I wonder where
> on earth it's from.

The info I have is that I emailed Alf in February 2023 asking if the kid getting paddled was a boy or a girl. And he replied "I *think* it's a boy but not completely sure lol!"

I think even back then, it was a pic that I'd seen online loads of times before. But the internet is weird. It seems like search results show particular pics and not other pics, and it changes from one year to another as to which ones they show. Even if all of the pics are still available online on the same websites as they used to be.

Kind of a similar thing, flickr occasionally goes crazy and bans specific pics for no sane reason. Like it once banned a totally ordinary pic that was obviously a re-enactment in a school and everyone was fully clothed and the pic didn't even show a swat landing. It just showed a boy stretched over the teacher's desk.

You are right about the quality and I have some theories about that too lol. Of course it could be a pic taken recently with a digital camera and they just decided to take it in monochrome for whatever reason.

But it still seems to me more likely. That it's actually from an old movie and it's somehow been scanned directly from the original camera footage. Because I think old-style professional analog movie cameras didn't really have specific limits on resolution like the early digital ones did. Apparently the original high-quality 35mm movie cameras were standardised as early as 1909.

And some 35mm movie cameras even that old, could have picture resolution as good as 720p or 1080p "high definition" as we call it now. Even though it wouldn't be a specific numerical resolution like that of course.

But most of what ends up on the internet, if it comes from that long ago. Has lost quality along the way. For example for some old movies, the original was filmed in 35mm with lots of quality. Then it was later transferred onto some other format, like VTR maybe - losing some quality. Then it got broadcast on TV from the VTR version, losing some more quality. Then someone recorded it onto VHS or some other format from the TV broadcast, losing even more quality. Then they uploaded it to YouTube in some low-quality format like 240p or 360p, losing even *more* quality. Then I take a screenshot from the YouTube video, and it looks awful and grainy.

So if a frame from a proper old 35mm movie has got turned into a digital image more directly, missing out some of these steps, it can easily end up being much higher quality. Maybe this one (the grandpa paddling) was something like that?

Other forum pics are low quality for other reasons. For example some of them are scans or photographs of school yearbooks that were originally published last century. And the older yearbooks used whatever technology they had at the time (I don't really know how they turned old-style analog photos into printed things on paper). So even if the scan or photograph is using the best quality possible, what's actually on the original piece of paper in the super old yearbook just doesn't have any detail. There's one where the dot-pattern used in the yearbook for the kid's pants, ended up identical to the dot-pattern used for his bare skin (the shades in the original photo were just that similar) so it looked like he wasn't wearing pants even though he was.