Shutter Efficiency w/ Leaf Shutters & Higher Speeds...

[Q.G.]

But the word aperture is indeed heard often. And almost always used correctly too. Just like the OP did.
I don't know why we should avoid the word.

[2F/2F]

But the word aperture is indeed heard often. And almost always used correctly too. Just like the OP did.
I don't know why we should avoid the word.

We should not avoid the word. We should avoid using the word to mean anything other than aperture, or in a way that might be confusing to those who do not yet know better.

The phrases "stop up" and "stop down" seem to be the most confusing to beginners, as they are a hybrid of "open up or close down your aperture", and "select a lesser or greater f number". They are second nature to me, but I am trying to avoid them.

Another doozy that throws anyone for a loop is "smaller/larger f stop". When someone says that, you don't have much of an idea which way they are saying to go. Are they using the term f stop incorrectly to mean aperture? Are they using it to mean a smaller/larger denominator in the f stop? In short, you don't know if they are talking about the quotient, or just the denominator.

I try to avoid "smaller/larger" for anything but references to the aperture. I use greater and lesser, and I also use f number instead of f stop, to make it clear that I am talking about the denominator only.

The use by the original poster was correct in the original post, though vague ("...small apertures..."). I will have to look for the one that was not.

[Q.G.]

If it is understood that "aperture" means nothing more nothing less than "opening", that when you stop something you fill in an opening, there should not be much confusion, yes.

Talk about aperture does not have to be talk about the actual, i.e. 'non-optical', size of the opening. No such restrictions exist.

I would avoid saying things like "stopping up" (must say i haven't heard that one before). "Opening up" and "stopping down" it is.

A smaller f stop indeed is a smaller opening, is a smaller aperture. That is correct.
You're confusing f stops with f-numbers yourself, i think.

[2F/2F]

You're confusing f stops with f-numbers yourself, i think.

I am not. I am speaking of knowing whether or not to trust a fellow shooter; speaking of the fact that, not knowing the proclivity for accurate use of terminology by this person, and knowing the easy possibility for confusion in the matter, it can be bad to assume that they are always using the right terminology, and not a common misnomer for something.

So, when someone says "smaller/larger f stop", I always ask them to clarify. That was all I meant. I also stated that I personally use "greater/lesser f number". A lesser f number describes a larger aperture, and vice versa. The use of the word "number" clarifies that you are talking about the numbers on the lens, and not the size of the aperture.

I have always heard "stop up" and "stop down", and "open up" and "close down"...for...well, forever!

Yes. A smaller f stop is indeed a smaller aperture...but how do you know that the person to whom you are talking knows this?

In short, your "If it is understood..." is a rather huge IF. You can trust yourself, but not just anyone.

Maybe I have more faith in the general amount of extreme technical ignorance of most people than you do, so I try to be extra clear when talking with students and other shooters.

[Q.G.]

I am not.

Not after you have edited your post, perhaps. No.

I agree that wrong use of words can be confusing. But we mustn't assume that people use terms incorrectly. If we don't know, we can ask indeed.

[Q.G.]

I see again that i should quote the entire post i'm replying to.
"In short", they get longer while i'm writing a reply.

[2F/2F]

I see again that i should quote the entire post i'm replying to.
"In short", they get longer while i'm writing a reply.

Yes, I tend to write fast to get the vomit onto the page, and then rewrite constantly...as do most trained writers.

In this paragraph:

"The phrases "stop up" and "stop down" seem to be the most confusing to beginners, as they are a hybrid of "open up or close down your aperture", and "select a lesser or greater f number". They are second nature to me, but I am trying to avoid them."

I originally had the word stop where number is in this paragraph. I did not, however, change anything in response to anything you wrote, to make myself more correct, as you have stated.

In this case, the change does not make me any more or less correct. The edit came from my realization that I had myself used the word stop where by my own standard I should have used the word number. The correctness remains the same with either word in this particular sentence, but I wanted to meet my own standard once I explained it in a later added paragraph. Additionally, note the quotations. They indicate that these are common phrases, not necessarily how I would state them.

[Q.G.]

Yes, I tend to write and rewrite constantly.

I did not, however, change anything in response to anything you wrote.

Perhaps not. But you added stuff, turning the thing around a bit.
How does that not qualify as changing anything?

I've inserted a longish pause here...
And lo and behold:

Yes, I tend to write fast to get the vomit onto the page, and then rewrite constantly...as do most trained writers.

In this paragraph:

"The phrases "stop up" and "stop down" seem to be the most confusing to beginners, as they are a hybrid of "open up or close down your aperture", and "select a lesser or greater f number". They are second nature to me, but I am trying to avoid them."

I originally had the word stop where number is in this paragraph. I did not, however, change anything in response to anything you wrote, to make myself more correct, as you have stated.

In this case, the change does not make me any more or less correct. The edit came from my realization that I had myself used the word stop where by my own standard I should have used the word number. The correctness remains the same with either word in this particular sentence, but I wanted to meet my own standard once I explained it in a later added paragraph.

This doesn't work, 2F.

1. Assuming that people are wrong put you in this strange mess.
2. Do you indeed first ask? Considering 1. why?


Yes indeed you did change the meaning of your statement!
Hoping to make it sound more correct, i presume. (I only presume, not assume, that people are incorrect )

The phrase I used was, "I did, however, change everything in response to anything you wrote."

You'll do it anyway (thus making a conversation nigh impossible), so i might as well not wait and do it myself.

[2F/2F]

Not after you have edited your post, perhaps. No.

I agree that wrong use of words can be confusing. But we mustn't assume that people use terms incorrectly. If we don't know, we can ask indeed.

1. I do assume this. I must. I consider it a good survival skill that has been honed based on experience.

2. I do ask...often...because of number one!

[2F/2F]

Perhaps not. But you added stuff, turning the thing around a bit.
How does that not qualify as chancing anything?

I've inserted a longish pause here...
And lo and behold:

I added stuff. I did not change meaning or "[turn] the thing around a bit".

The phrase I used was, "I did not, however, change anything in response to anything you wrote."

If I intended to not change anything, I would not edit. Thus, of course I never stated that I did not change anything.

So, your question, "How does that not qualify as chancing anything?" cannot really be answered, because it refers to a statement that was not made.