Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,890   Posts: 1,520,845   Online: 1153
      
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    234

    intrusive photons

    This one is weird. Really weird, but it's been on my mind so here goes. I have a photographer friend ( I assure you it is not me) who has spent a great deal of his life researching, studying and making "snapshots". His greatest interest is in the snapshots of his family members. Why? It is his contention that all photographs contain a piece of the thing photographed. A photon of light hits a subject(his grandfather lets say) and since light is both a wave and a particle the particle part of the light bounces off the subject and strikes the film embedding a part of his grandfather in the film emulsion.Don't laugh. It is his contention that anytime something is touched by something else a part of the touchee goes with the toucher. Now I enjoy reading the popular physics books,Kaku,Greenfield etc. but I don't believe that I've ever run into anything that verifies this theory, but I haven't seen anything that refutes it. Is the cliche true? Is part of a person or things very essence physically captured in a photograph?
    SHOUT OUT TO BLANSKY- You recently referemced Heisenbergs Uncertainty Priciple in a thread about, I think, art, concepts and commerce. What about this one?
    Jack B

  2. #2
    rbarker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rio Rancho, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,222
    Images
    2
    One man's snapshots are another's photojournalism.

    While I would argue that we make no changes to the photons that bounce off our exteriors, the fact that the footsteps of those photons on our film can evoke memories of, or insights into, the subjects in our minds is the essence of photography.
    [COLOR=SlateGray]"You can't depend on your eyes if your imagination is out of focus." -Mark Twain[/COLOR]

    Ralph Barker
    Rio Rancho, NM

  3. #3
    Michel Hardy-Vallée's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Montréal (QC)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,351
    Images
    132
    Meh, it depends again how you define "true". It's analog for sure, in the sense that something material in reality has a material partial replica on the film, but one thing I know for sure is that photons do not carry souls, even if I don't believe there is such an empirical concept as soul. When the photon that was reflected off your grandpa crosses through the lens and hits the film, it triggers a light-sensitive crystal, but it does not "stay" there.
    Using film since before it was hip.


    "One of the most singular characters of the hyposulphites, is the property their solutions possess of dissolving muriate of silver and retaining it in considerable quantity in permanent solution" — Sir John Frederick William Herschel, "On the Hyposulphurous Acid and its Compounds." The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, Vol. 1 (8 Jan. 1819): 8-29. p. 11

    My APUG Portfolio

  4. #4
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    The photons never actually "touch" anything. The photons interact with the object's atoms and are repelled by atomic forces.

    They can't take anything of the object with them because they never actually touch it...


    Probably....


    Cheers, Bob.

  5. #5
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,155
    Images
    20
    This sounds like the conceptual artist who swept up dust from around great works of art and displayed the dust in a vial framed with a snapshot of the work. The theory was that the dust contained particles from the original work.
    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

  6. #6
    127
    127 is offline
    127's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    uk
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    581
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb
    The theory was that the dust contained particles from the original work.
    That sounds a LOT more plausible than photons "carrying" anything.

    Assuming his grandfather wasn't flourecent, then the photon that bounces off him is pretty much unchanged. It doesn't even change colour - it either bounces or it doesn't.

    There's certianly no physical track back. On the other hand I certainly don't have any problem with being attatched to an object that physically interacted with someone I want to remember, and a "real" print certainly meets that criterea.

    Who wouldn't want to play a guitar owned by Hendrix - it wouldn't make me a better player, but it would make me a happy player...

    Ian

  7. #7
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by severian
    SHOUT OUT TO BLANSKY- You recently referemced Heisenbergs Uncertainty Priciple in a thread about, I think, art, concepts and commerce. What about this one?
    Jack B
    http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~imamura/208/jan27/hup.html
    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

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    234

    touching

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    The photons never actually "touch" anything. The photons interact with the object's atoms and are repelled by atomic forces.

    They can't take anything of the object with them because they never actually touch it...


    Probably....


    Cheers, Bob.
    Bob,
    does anything actually ever touch anything else?
    Jack

  9. #9
    Will S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    698
    Images
    34
    Everything is interconnected, but I don't think it is quite in the way your friend imagines. That idea is more along the lines of astrology and reading of entrails.

    From a pure physics standpoint a photon exhibits characteristics of a wave in some instances and a particle in others, but it is still a photon. Actually, I think that everything is like that, but that the waves larger objects have are very, very small. Let me see: See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave-particle_duality

    Best,

    Will
    "I am an anarchist." - HCB
    "I wanna be anarchist." - JR

  10. #10
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by severian
    Bob,
    does anything actually ever touch anything else?
    Jack
    Only if you want a REALLY loud bang....



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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