Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,347   Posts: 1,682,500   Online: 775
      
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 51
  1. #31
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    Oh gawd... The fact that a word is in the OED, simply reflects that the word is in common usage. As "previsualization" is in common use, you would expect it to be in the OED. QED.

    Visualisation is the verb form of "visualize" and it can mean imagining a future event or object etc. To visualize something is to create a mental image of it. Visualize is one of several synonyms for prevision depending on context (prescience, foresight, prediction, prospicience etc). I do not know the verb form of prevision, but I will be very surprised to find it is previsualize as that would cause problems, as previously related, with "visualize". Of course, the fact that it may not make semantic sense, does not mean it has not been in general use for centuries: this is English after all....

    Cheers, Bob.

  2. #32
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    has any one ever thought of doing the photography version of Jeopardy? I'll take Photography Semantics for 100, Alex.
    Non Digital Diva

  3. #33
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    Oh gawd... The fact that a word is in the OED, simply reflects that the word is in common usage. As "previsualization" is in common use, you would expect it to be in the OED. QED.
    Incorrect. The OED does not contain only words in common uage. It contains many archaic words. I cannot find any dictionary that lists "previsualization" as a word - can anyone? I've only checked OED and Meriam-Webster. I suspect the word is one that is made up and is not yet accepted into common usage and codified in a dictionary.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    Visualisation is the verb form of "visualize" and it can mean imagining a future event or object etc. To visualize something is to create a mental image of it. Visualize is one of several synonyms for prevision depending on context (prescience, foresight, prediction, prospicience etc).
    Also incorrect. Visualize cannot mean visualizing a future event. You are mixing the definitions of visualization and prevision. To visualize is defined as "To form a mental vision, image or picture of something not visible or present to the sight, or of an abstraction; to make visible to the mind or the imagination".

    Prevision is defined as "The action or faculty of forseeing; knowledge of or insight into the future; foresight, foreknowledge."

    Thus, 'visualize' and 'prevision' are not the same thing and cannot be synonyms. The distinction between the two is 'seeing' future images. To 'visualize' you see things in the present or past that are not currently within sight. It can also be seeing a mental image of something that is abstract and cannot exist in any time. To 'prevision' involves seeing something in the future - you cannot 'prevision' something in the past or that exists but is not currently in sight. The clear distinction is that 'prevision' involves 'future' events.

    It is pretty clear why 'prevision' was chosen as the root of 'previsualization', then and not 'visualize'. It means to see, in the present, in one's mind, a future finished print not yet realized but one that will be when the photographic process is completed.

    In contract, one can visualize any image in one's mind that will or cannot become reality in the future. I have been out with photogapher's who have loooked at some scene and when I asked them what the saw, they may say 'I see a fantasy land'. Well, they may be able to visualize that but it is not prevision. It is pure fantasy, an image of something not present, not in the past and will come come forth in the future. Thus, it is 'visualization'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    I do not know the verb form of prevision
    The verb form of prevision is: prevision. As you know, some words can be more than one part of speech.

  4. #34
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    OK, so the OED contains words that used to be in common usage as well as ones that are: that's just nit-picking.

    Earlier you wrote that "Previsualization is an English term for the simple fact that it's in the OED. And since it existed at least 400 years ago, AA and Minor White certainly did not invent it" but, now you say you can't find it in any dictionary. I'm getting even more confused than usual... I could not find it in any online dictionary either but do not have access to the OED here so was unable to read your observation for myself: did you mean "prevision" rather than "previsualisation" is over 400 years old & in the OED?.

    "To form a mental vision, image or picture of something not visible or present to the sight, or of an abstraction; to make visible to the mind or the imagination"

    Why does this definition of visualize preclude the visualization of something yet to be created? I think you are placing artificial restrictions on the breadth of the definition. At no point does it specify that the object visualized must currently exist.

    From Websters: "Visualize \Vis"u*al*ize\, v. t. To make visual, or visible; to see in fancy: also, to see or form a mental image of "

    Similarly to the other definition, it allows for "fancy" ("imagination" in the previous definition) - i.e. something that does not exist, not necessarily something that cannot or will not exist. In fact, Websters definition of prevision ("Foresight; foreknowledge; prescience) is arguably further away from the accepted meaning of "previsualize" than Webster's definition of "visualize"...

    No one said they mean the same thing: context is all.

    ("synonym n : two words that can be interchanged in a context are said to be synonymous relative to that context").

    Clearly a word may have the same meaning as another in one context but not another. I could prevision the aftermath of a car crash. I can also visualize the aftermath of a car crash (the "fancy" or "imagination" is the get-out clause here). However, I cannot prevision Narnia but I could visualize it. I'll happily concede that prevision is a more precise word for what is generally meant by previsualize as it is more specific in meaning, but will hold that visualize can, in this context, be considered synonymous.

    I would also suggest that Minor White (or whoever) did not know of the existence of "prevision" as if he did, he could simply have used "prevision" and not gone to the trouble of adding "pre" to visualize which, to return to the original point of my post, makes no real sense as a word... He likely would have coined "previsioning" or "previsionize" (yuk) if anything. Of course, we will never know for sure one way or 'tother.

    Ah - forgot to mention: everyone who does not use "previsualize" in this context uses "visualise" instead (inc St. Ansel himself in his books). As a word's meaning is defined by it's widespread usage then at this stage of the game, "visualize" is synonymous with "previsualize" (in this context) ...


    Cheers, Bob.

  5. #35
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    OK, so the OED contains words that used to be in common usage as well as ones that are: that's just nit-picking.
    It's not nit-picking. I'm trying to establish the OED as a source\proof text. You tried to limit it's scope\aplicability incorrectly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    Earlier you wrote that "Previsualization is an English term for the simple fact that it's in the OED. And since it existed at least 400 years ago, AA and Minor White certainly did not invent it" but, now you say you can't find it in any dictionary. I'm getting even more confused than usual... I could not find it in any online dictionary either but do not have access to the OED here so was unable to read your observation for myself: did you mean "prevision" rather than "previsualisation" is over 400 years old & in the OED?.
    Here is a copy\paste of what I originally wrote (please note 'prevision'). I fI subsequently substituted 'previsualization', that was an error:

    "Also, the root of this word, 'prevision' might have first occured in english in the 14th century with direct references in the 1600's and onward. This according to the Oxford Dictionary Of The English Language, not my personal recollection."
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    "To form a mental vision, image or picture of something not visible or present to the sight, or of an abstraction; to make visible to the mind or the imagination"

    Why does this definition of visualize preclude the visualization of something yet to be created? I think you are placing artificial restrictions on the breadth of the definition. At no point does it specify that the object visualized must currently exist.
    Simple. Because if you want to describe a visualization of something in the future, you would use the word 'prevision' or one of it's true synonyms. It's like if you wanted to say 'apple' you would say 'apple' and not 'orange'. I believe in using the proper words and I use the dictionary as the source\proof text - not common usage. If that were the reference, there would be symantic anarchy, my friend, and you know what leads to. The definition of 'visualize' makes no reference to future images but prevision clearly does. While it is possible to visualize images and say they are future events (like fantasizing what the future would be like), it is not prevision (or 'previsualization') because there is no intent or expectation that it will come to pass. There is a clear distinction between the two.

    Look at your own quote, where you literally spell out the difference:

    From Websters: "Visualize \Vis"u*al*ize\, v. t. To make visual, or visible; to see in fancy: also, to see or form a mental image of " [/QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    Similarly to the other definition, it allows for "fancy" ("imagination" in the previous definition) - i.e. something that does not exist, not necessarily something that cannot or will not exist. In fact, Websters definition of prevision ("Foresight; foreknowledge; prescience) is arguably further away from the accepted meaning of "previsualize" than Webster's definition of "visualize"...
    The definition does not allow for 'fancy', it requires it. If it is 'fancy' then it is visualization. If it is foresight, it is 'prevision'. Totally different things. AA did not conjure a 'fanciful' image in his head and neither do I. It is a 'foresight' of an image we will make after the printing is done.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    No one said they mean the same thing: context is all.

    ("synonym n : two words that can be interchanged in a context are said to be synonymous relative to that context").....<snip>
    No. If they don't mean the same thing, they cannot be synonyms - if they are used as synonyms in common usage then the ones doing that are wrong and need to read the dictionary. 'Context' cannot re-define words. The correct words need to be used in the correct context or valid discussions cannot exist - that's why semantics are so important.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    I would also suggest that Minor White (or whoever) did not know of the existence of "prevision"...
    Who knows. He was a smart guy and he may have heard of the dictionary and actually researched it. He may well have said exactly what he meant.
    But I do know that EW described the exact process in his daybooks and was tlking about prevision, not visualization.[/QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    Ah - forgot to mention: everyone who does not use "previsualize" in this context uses "visualise" instead (inc St. Ansel himself in his books). As a word's meaning is defined by it's widespread usage then at this stage of the game, "visualize" is synonymous with "previsualize" (in this context) ...
    I guess you speak for all English speaking people? For me, I prefer to use the words correctly - each has it's own specific meaning. BTW, the definition of a word is not decided until it's codified. People can make up whatever words they want and mis-use words and one day that may be recognized in a dictionary - certainly they are living documents, but once codified the definitions are pretty clear - certainly they are for these 2 words which have been around for hundreds of years. I see no need to re-define and mis-use them. Their meanings and distinctions are clear.

    -Mike

    Cheers, Bob.[/QUOTE]

  6. #36
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by mikewhi
    Here is a copy\paste of what I originally wrote (please note 'prevision'). I fI subsequently substituted 'previsualization', that was an error:
    Fair enough - as I thought, you accidently used "previsualize" instead of "prevision".

    Look at your own quote, where you literally spell out the difference:

    From Websters: "Visualize \Vis"u*al*ize\, v. t. To make visual, or visible; to see in fancy: also, to see or form a mental image of "

    The definition does not allow for 'fancy', it requires it. If it is 'fancy' then it is visualization. If it is foresight, it is 'prevision'. Totally different things. AA did not conjure a 'fanciful' image in his head and neither do I. It is a 'foresight' of an image we will make after the printing is done.
    Now you are defining "fancy" in too limited a way. Webster's again: "An image or representation of anything formed in the mind; conception; thought; idea; conceit."

    No. If they don't mean the same thing, they cannot be synonyms - if they are used as synonyms in common usage then the ones doing that are wrong and need to read the dictionary. 'Context' cannot re-define words. The correct words need to be used in the correct context or valid discussions cannot exist - that's why semantics are so important.
    Of course context defines words! "I've had a hard day - I'm very blue at the moment" does not mean I have gone mad with a paint brush and a bucket of wode...

    I guess you speak for all English speaking people? For me, I prefer to use the words correctly - each has it's own specific meaning. BTW, the definition of a word is not decided until it's codified. People can make up whatever words they want and mis-use words and one day that may be recognized in a dictionary - certainly they are living documents, but once codified the definitions are pretty clear - certainly they are for these 2 words which have been around for hundreds of years. I see no need to re-define and mis-use them. Their meanings and distinctions are clear.
    Of course I do not speak for all English speaking people! Of course I do not mean "everyone" in a literal sense - it is simply a device to emphasize the "overwhelming majority of". It is simply my observation that I do not recall ever having seen, heard or read anyone use any other words when describing how they see a final print turning out. Actually, not quite true - I have seen a hyphen inserted: "pre-visualize" - but that's a whole new can of worms...

    Mike, we are obviously not going to agree on this so to avoid constant repetition, to protect driving anyone who reads this thread from terminal boredom (of course, I do not mean that they will literally die - just to be clear...) I think you should have your final say and we can agree to let this drop at that point.


    Cheers, Bob.

  7. #37
    Dave Wooten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Vegas/mysterious mohave co. az, Big Pine Key Fla.
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    2,718
    Images
    20
    This has gotten interesting but,

    Where did Ansel come up with the concept of visualization?

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2

    Is it semantics or etymology?

    I think some of the problem here is that the word prevision has nothing to do with the disscussion at all. The word that has not been mentioned, as far as I can tell, is envision. Envision is a synonym of visualize. I think, then, that the word envisualize is what we should be saying instead of previsualize, because like many have said, it doesn't make a darn bit of sense. I hope this doesn't just stir the coals.

    Paul

  9. #39
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Baker
    I think some of the problem here is that the word prevision has nothing to do with the disscussion at all. The word that has not been mentioned, as far as I can tell, is envision. Envision is a synonym of visualize. I think, then, that the word envisualize is what we should be saying instead of previsualize, because like many have said, it doesn't make a darn bit of sense. I hope this doesn't just stir the coals.

    Paul

    AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNGGGGG!!!!

    .



  10. #40
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,217
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wooten
    This has gotten interesting but,
    Where did Ansel come up with the concept of visualization?
    Probably a mutated extension of Stieglitz's concept of 'equivalents'. The print as simulacrum of what the photographer saw and felt at the time. He sees, or 'visualizes' it, if you will, in his mind's eye before making the exposure.

    Pure baloney, in my always humble and unbiased opinion. The visualization takes place on the ground glass and only on the ground glass. What caught your eye and prompted you to set up the camera has nothing to do with the act of photographing once you're involved in finding the image on the ground glass or viewfinder.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin