It's faster to use the dictionary, and you don't have to worry about the DSL running slow. But's it all
doomed anyway.... kids texting of cell phones have eliminated the need for vowels. Case in point, one
pothead to another : HDDDDDD .... translation: "Hey, Doooooood"
I heard an ad on the radio today. The company is selling digital pianos. :blink:
And here I thought that they were digital from day one.
Not everyone that uses film uses it for slow moving or still subjects. Perhaps that is your idea of what film photography is, don't assume that it's universal.
Maybe you don't need or want autofocus, good for you. What prerogative does that give you to judge what others want or need?
What's the problem with a digital device (most modern AF lenses are) having a digital maintenance facility like firmware upgrades? If you choose not to use them either use a MF lens or an old AF on your film cameras. BTW one can still be a Luddite and work in a tech field. You could be maintaining old Cobol code for all I know or care. What one does for a living is a popular but mostly irrelevant reinforcement of personal opinion on internet forums generally. OzJohn
Originally Posted by Mainecoonmaniac
I have a roll of Rollei IR 400 in my camera right now (my first IR roll ever). I hope the IR filter I use, which is labeled as a digital filter, doesn't block all the analog IR, otherwise I'm screwed. Oh wait, electromagnetic radiation also exists as discrete photons, which means digital. :blink:
Originally Posted by jnanian
The idea is to "make" an image, the tool you use is up to you. I've seen award winning images come from instamatics because its all about composition and creativity not what you use to make an image.
It is my understanding that Luddites were not strictly opposed to technology but were more opposed to the way it was used.
Originally Posted by OzJohn
They considered machines to be a way to increase productivity and to make the work people do better but when machines were used to replace skilled workers with low-payed, unskilled workers, that is when they drew the line.
I like technology but I often don't like the way it is used. When machines override human judgement, especially when it becomes difficult to override automation and apply judgement, I draw the line.
I think technology should be used to help people to perform work better, not to replace workers. While I like the idea of Sigma's lenses, I'm still not completely sold. It seems like technology for its own sake, to me.
Photography as art should be made from human work and creativity, not from a machine or a computer program.
I'm not going to disagree with you there. A lot of the time a lot of functionality is introduced to sell widgets as opposed to improve widgets. The megapixel arms race of the noughties was a prime example.
Originally Posted by Worker 11811
That being said, I was dead against things such as smart phones and the like, but I have become quite a convert recently.
I agree about technology and human endeavors like art. On an other note, I hope all this new defense technology won't be a substitute for diplomacy. I don't like how drones are used.
If you are using a smart phone to be more productive and to help make the work you do better, then all right.
If you are using a smart phone just because it's the latest gadget, no good.
I was told that Amish people don't use phones just because they don't want technology. It is partly because they have a religious requirement to remain separate from "English" society but it's also because they believe that, if you want to talk to your neighbor, it is better to get your lazy butt off the sofa, walk down the road and knock on your friend's door. The Amish place a high value on face-to-face contact and personal interaction. Not a bad value to have, really. ;)