Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 28, 2010, 8:39 PM   #51
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,585
Default

This nit picking bantering reminds me when Clinton was on trial and he wanted a definition of every word ......what is the meaning of 'is'? I would think that a photograph should at least start out as one. The question of how much alteration before it loses that definition is what started this thread. I dont agree at all that a photo realistic image created in the computer with software can be called a photograph in any way shape or form. I think that Tcav agrees with this and Chato doesnt. As for needing photosensitive material I guess that also would include the chip that catches the light in the camera. Aside from that chip photos can go from the camera to a storage device to be displayed on a monitor. Photosensitive paper would never be necessary. Ok. Carry on guys.

Last edited by Bynx; Feb 28, 2010 at 8:42 PM.
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2010, 3:55 AM   #52
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Photosensitive paper isn't necessary for 'Photography'. Lots of people used slide film over the years, and that was and is 'Photography'. What is necessary for 'Photography' is a 'Camera'. That is, a device for focusing light onto a photosensitive surface. Whatever happens after that, may or may not be 'Photography', but photography starts with a camera.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2010, 7:25 AM   #53
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,585
Default

Light for photography are actually photons arent they? Whereas light in the computer is just a pixel turned on. Can the two be compared?
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2010, 7:56 AM   #54
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bynx View Post
Light for photography are actually photons arent they? Whereas light in the computer is just a pixel turned on. Can the two be compared?
Actually, there's no such thing as light in a computer. (Well, not the computers we're talking about here.) What there is is a value that is adjusted by software, that instructs the monitor to project a brighter image. But, just to be clear, it's the monitor that creates the light, not the software.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.

Last edited by TCav; Mar 1, 2010 at 8:52 AM.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2010, 5:24 PM   #55
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
Where's your photosensitive surface?

That's in context.
My photosensive surface is the exact same surface used by any other method of aquiring the image. When you "print" from Photoshop, or "print" from Maya or Strata. The camera does NOT do the printing.

BTW, did you ever see "the photographs" created by the bombing of Hiroshima?

Dave
Chato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2010, 5:26 PM   #56
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bynx View Post
Light for photography are actually photons arent they? Whereas light in the computer is just a pixel turned on. Can the two be compared?
There's a kind of photography, spelling begins with a K, where electricity is used to generate the image. No photons, (for that matter, no camera)

Yet it's called photography, and I've never read of anyone objecting to calling them photographs.

Dave
Chato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2010, 7:33 PM   #57
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chato View Post
My photosensive surface is the exact same surface used by any other method of aquiring the image. When you "print" from Photoshop, or "print" from Maya or Strata. The camera does NOT do the printing.
'Printing' has nothing to do with photography. When I print this web page, the result is not a photograph. What makes something a photograph is acquiring the image by projecting it onto a photosensitive surface.

Where's you photosensitive surface?
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2010, 8:09 PM   #58
Senior Member
 
VTphotog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Extreme Northeastern Vermont, USA
Posts: 4,214
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chato View Post
There's a kind of photography, spelling begins with a K, where electricity is used to generate the image. No photons, (for that matter, no camera)

Yet it's called photography, and I've never read of anyone objecting to calling them photographs.

Dave
It's called Kirlian photography, and has been debunked a long time ago.

brian
VTphotog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2010, 8:33 PM   #59
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Kirlian photography creates images on photosensitive surfaces. What the images are of is a source of much speculation, but they are created on photosensitive surfaces.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2010, 9:22 PM   #60
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Decatur, GA
Posts: 2,053
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjseeney View Post
Photojournalism on the other handshould be restricted to presenting the image as it naturally appeared and should not be manipulated in any way.
Agreed but they should be allowed fix the white balance and crop as needed........ Maybe noise reduction software applied on sports images but nothing more than that

dave
Photo 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:34 PM.