Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,300   Posts: 1,535,813   Online: 728
      
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 72
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    471
    I think its all symantics at this point. Who cares. I've got lots of names for most digital users....

  2. #12
    Digidurst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    SC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    629
    Images
    10
    You guys, this bugs me... Now ya'll can tell me to shove it where the sun doesn't shine but at least let me say my peace... or is it piece?
    Anyway!
    Do you know what some digital photographers are saying about analog photographers? They carry on and on AND ON about out-dated we are, how we just don't get it, that we might as well sell all our analog gear because we're not going to be able to buy film, darkroom supplies, etc. TOMORROW.
    Oh come on already! Nobody is forcing anybody else to use anything they don't want to use. Nobody is forcing anybody to look at what they don't want to look at. But most importantly, nobody has the right to tell anybody that what they use to pursue their personal vision is wrong.
    With the world going digital, I can understand [to a degree] that you might feel your craft is being threatened. But stop for a moment and look around... Look at how popular alternative processes are these days. And look at how many digital photographers are adding film BACK INTO their work (I know, I'm one of them).
    As the saying goes, there are many paths to heaven just as there are 14 dozen + ways of making a photograph.
    So the question is... Why would you waste your creative energy on ANYTHING that doesn't directly lead to your creation of images that YOU are proud to display?

    (The floor is now open to the next person who wants some soapbox time)

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,236
    Images
    9
    I can't get audio blogs at work damnit.
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  4. #14
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    we are in a 2 dimensional segment called artists. From there you have many subcatgories, ie: oil painting, watercolor, drawing, acrylics, photography, and a few more. Each of these can have subcatagories as well. Photography has two disintinct main catgories. Analog and digital. Under Analog we have the subcatagories of silver gelatin, alternative process, wet/dryplate and such. Under digital, you have the two catagories and that is it, Non photoshopped, and photoshopped.

    For those who say that analog and digital are the same thing photography where light is captured, well that can be argued too. With film you use light sensitive emulsion to chemically through the contact of light wavelengths change the chemical composition by oxidation. With digital you have micro portions of a second devoted to layering in upon each other different intensities of light excited pixels to digitize the wave lengths into 0's and 1's This is then processed via computer chips and other devises to be out put. Analog depends on a camera and some sort of light sensitve chemically treated base to capture that images wave lengths. The addition of lenses helps to clarify that image further. As for digital, a camera is not nesecary. You must have some sort of chip to store the information. Neither is it dependent on a lens for clarification. Physics defines how the analog image is captured via the seperation of wavelengths and the length of distance from image to chemical sensitive substrate to capture said light wavelengths. Digital doesn't need this physical constraint. What holds back analog is the size of the camera and the film that it can use. What holds back digital is the size of the chip it uses for storage. Analog captures minutia, digital is like digital music, it only captures a certain range. Both given that there is no operator error.

    As to the argument that digital is tired of hearing us defend ourselves, well then is it not time for digital to not attack? We start from a similar basis like oil is to acrylics, but they are two different mediums, but still painting. Take that further and you have painting that has it's basis in drawing. Tell an oil painter they drew a pretty picture and see what they have to say.

    To me it is enough to say analog and digital. if digital doesn't like the moniker, they can figure out what to call themselves. but luddite analog is taken.
    Last edited by Aggie; 03-15-2005 at 05:00 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Non Digital Diva

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    695
    Images
    3

    Semantically Speaking

    Continuing with the (dubious but popular) analogy to music, to say that any use of digital tech invalidates "photography" as such is to say that any use of a synth renders music no longer as music.

    Clearly we know better. Enough music (good, bad, or otherwise) has used synths, patches, samples, etc to get past the whole "if it doesnt come from wood/brass/iron/gut/whatever, it's not really music" bit.

    Is the sort of illustration shown in the thread "photography?" Once again, we know better. But neither are the early composographs made up solely of "real" photographic images such as this.

    There is a clear line between graphic illustration and photography. Simply put, photography involves the deliberate capture of light and shadow (photo) and the printing or display thereof (graph).

    If we further define photography as only involving capturing light on a non-photovoltaic surface (thus allowing for things like liquid emulsions, tintypes, etc) that might get to where the group seems to want to go.

    However, (and I say this having a whole locker of beautiful old rangefinders, film winders, and developing tanks) it would be dubious at best to limit the very human experience of captured imagery (that whicih people define as "photography") to those images only captured non-photovoltaically.

    I think at best we can say, as has been said over and over here at APUG, that we are analog photographers.

  6. #16
    chuck94022's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    602
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    10
    AND FURTHERMORE, that guy at LensWorks is not a Blogger, either, because he didn't use a keyboard to enter his log. He used a *microphone*. That's not a web log, that's an audiolog! :-)

    By the way, I am a drummer and a guitarist. I happen to like being those things. That might make me a musician, but I like the specificity of the other definitions.

    And I thought his digital photo of a rose looked too waxy! SO THERE!

    :-)

    -chuck

  7. #17
    Flotsam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    S.E. New York State
    Posts
    3,221
    Images
    13
    Digidurst, I see your point but Brooks Jensen made the parallel that a Guitarist is to a Clarinetist as an Analog Photographer is to Digital Imager. IMHO a painfully flawed analogy. A more apt analogy would be between a Guitarist and a person that mimicks Guitar sounds digitally with a computer.
    The comparison is not between two identical things that simply are called by different names. A virtual Rose really does not smell as sweet as an actual Rose. It should have a distinctive name.

    BTW: I waste lots of creative energy on things that don't directly lead to my creation of images that I am proud to display
    That is called grain. It is supposed to be there.
    =Neal W.=

  8. #18
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Thanks for everyone's comments. I felt that Brooks lumped all film lovers into a category of "out of date" oldtimers who all automatically rebel at digital people calling themselves "photographers". Hmm, I wonder if Brooks will read this thread.
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,236
    Images
    9
    What is wrong with computer aided imaging. CAI for short. Non offensive, sterile like the process and tells the whole story.

    But I am also heavily in the I don't give a damn category these days. Let them justify and whine eventually they will find their niche and be proud to be there
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  10. #20
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,232
    Images
    20
    I agree with Flotsam (as an, umm..., "tromboner" myself) that the idea that they are just different instruments doesn't hold up as an analogy. There are a lot of creative musicians combining analogue and electronic sounds in interesting and complex ways, but I think a better analogy would be between acoustic instruments and midi. Midi control can be used to do interesting things, but most of it sounds like something that came out of a machine. I have yet to hear any sampled wind instrument that sounds like a real wind instrument. It's hard enough even to record an acoustic instrument in a way that sounds convincing.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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