View Full Version : Focal Encyclopedia of Photography
Tom Kershaw
01-19-2010, 06:20 AM
I notice Amazon.co.uk is currently discounting this book. Any comments on content or usefulness?
Tom
Anscojohn
01-19-2010, 07:28 AM
I think it began as the Ilford Encyclopedia.....My copy of the Focal is, perhaps, 20 yearsold. Dated, but always a good read; there is much obscure information.
Tom Kershaw
01-19-2010, 07:29 AM
The current edition appears to be from 2007.
Tom
RalphLambrecht
01-19-2010, 07:47 AM
I think it began as the Ilford Encyclopedia.....My copy of the Focal is, perhaps, 20 yearsold. Dated, but always a good read; there is much obscure information.
John
You must be thinking of the 'Ilford Manual of Photography', which is now called the 'The Manual of Photography'. 'The Focal Encyclopedia of Photography' was always call that. The 1st edition is from 1958. The current 4th edition was published in 2007.
RalphLambrecht
01-19-2010, 07:53 AM
I notice Amazon.co.uk is currently discounting this book. Any comments on content or usefulness?
Tom
Tom
I may not be the most objective person to answer that, because I wrote 30 pages of it, but I use this book frequently myself to find more detailed information about all areas of photography than one can find in more general books. It also includes a CD will pdf files covering the entire book, which is a fantastic search engine and far better than any index.
It's usefulness for you depends on what you're looking for.
Anscojohn
01-19-2010, 08:00 AM
John
You must be thinking of the 'Ilford Manual of Photography', which is now called the 'The Manual of Photography'. 'The Focal Encyclopedia of Photography' was also call that. The 1st edition is from 1958. The current 4th edition was published in 2007.
*******
Thank you. The binding on my Focal is getting a bit weak. perhaps I should consider buying the latest edition.
One nerver can have enough encyclopediae in house. But the Focal (3rd ed.) is the one I use least.
But, there is not much choice anyway.
Tom Kershaw
01-19-2010, 08:27 AM
Tom
I may not be the most objective person to answer that, because I wrote 30 pages of it, but I use this book frequently myself to find more detailed information about all areas of photography than one can find in more general books. It also includes a CD will pdf files covering the entire book, which is a fantastic search engine and far better than any index.
It's usefulness for you depends on what you're looking for.
As a general reference on photography for when one doesn't want to get bogged down on the internet for a several hours researching a topic.
Tom
RalphLambrecht
01-19-2010, 08:36 AM
*******
Thank you. The binding on my Focal is getting a bit weak. perhaps I should consider buying the latest edition.
Sorry John, I meant 'it was always called that' not 'also called that'. I fixed it in my original post.
RalphLambrecht
01-19-2010, 08:39 AM
One nerver can have enough encyclopediae in house. But the Focal (3rd ed.) is the one I use least.
But, there is not much choice anyway.
The 4th edition is totally different from the 3rd. The 3rd was an alphabetic listing of topics. The 4th is an arranged collection of reference articles.
RalphLambrecht
01-19-2010, 08:40 AM
As a general reference on photography for when one doesn't want to get bogged down on the internet for a several hours researching a topic.
Tom
I use it for that.
Mick Fagan
01-20-2010, 02:58 AM
Ralph, my edition of "The Focal Encyclopedia of Photography", is a revised 1960 reprint of the first edition, which was October 1956.
It is a two volume edition and cost me the grand sum of 20 cents at my local primary school fete many, many years ago. Possibly my best ever, value for money photographic purchase
I have in the past opened a page and found something interesting, then find that about 2 or so hours have gone by in a flash.
I also have the Ilford Manual of Photography, fifth edition May 1958, the 7th reprint was revised in March 1966, my edition is the 8th reprint, March 1968.
Mick.
Ross Chambers
01-20-2010, 06:02 AM
Isn't it pleasing to see the publishing history of these volumes recorded plainly in their introductory pages; try that with many digital technology guides, they seem to have a policy of obfuscation in currency for some reason.
Regards - Ross
Tom Kershaw
01-20-2010, 06:18 AM
try that with many digital technology guides, they seem to have a policy of obfuscation in currency for some reason.
Regards - Ross
Ross,
Could you explain what you mean by that?
Tom
I guess this is a bit in the line of Ross' comment: I regurlarly come across documents on the net (especially pdf's) that are not dated, because the original text had been scanned with some ignorance. But a printed matter is not necessarily better. I own a lot of books, especially dutch ones, which are not dated. Being historically minded, I find that quite annoying.
RalphLambrecht
01-20-2010, 12:40 PM
I guess this is a bit in the line of Ross' comment: I regurlarly come across documents on the net (especially pdf's) that are not dated, because the original text had been scanned with some ignorance. But a printed matter is not necessarily better. I own a lot of books, especially dutch ones, which are not dated. Being historically minded, I find that quite annoying.
Have we learned from this and date our photographs?
Tom Kershaw
01-20-2010, 12:44 PM
Ralph,
I've now ordered a copy of the book.
Tom
RalphLambrecht
01-20-2010, 12:50 PM
Ralph,
I've now ordered a copy of the book.
Tom
If everything else fails, you can always use it as a door stopper! :)
Tom Kershaw
01-20-2010, 01:04 PM
Your presence on this thread has reminded me that I should get back to working on calibrating my DeVere 5108 colour head.
Tom
Ross Chambers
01-21-2010, 02:42 AM
Ross,
Could you explain what you mean by that?
Tom
As a fairly keen reader of fiction and non fiction books the publication history is of interest to me. Most books not related to computer information have an original publication date, revision date, edition dates.
Some (and I probably exaggerated, just seems to be the ones I consider purchasing) books covering digital matters have no indication of their vintage, which, in the fast moving world of updates, makes their relevance iffy. I usually don't buy them.
Maybe there are rules and the Library of Congress would supply publication dates.
Maybe I got it wrong?
Regards - Ross