Philisophically, it represents every image that ever hit the sensor.
Think about that.
you guys need your own thread please. Way Off Topic.
Your summation is inexact enough to be incorrect. But even taking it at face value, it contradicts your assertion that the array is not altered and there is no latent image there--you yourself note that the array is different, in your version, during the exposure than it is before or after.
Originally Posted by wblynch
There is still exactly as much of a latent image there as there is in an exposed frame of film.
That's really here nor there, however. In either case, Naples' argument is nonsense.
This is APUG, who gives a f@*k about the array or the 1s and 0s. People, shut up and get yourself a new thread!
Sheeze! Page after page of drivel irrelevant to analogue photography.
Not impressed; I hold a doctorate.
Originally Posted by zumbido
Now, on to your invalid question; invalid because it presupposes that which has not been established and which in fact is not true.
You ask: “Please explain to me what the meaningful difference is between storing a latent image by accumulating electrons in silicon as opposed to silver?”
Your question presupposes that the electrons form an image, and that the image is “stored”. Both claims are patently false. THERE IS NO IMAGE THERE! AND NO IMAGE IS “STORED” THERE! (adding “latent” does nothing to make the string of 1s and 0s an image).
So to answer your question ... The meaningful difference is that the silver in the film forms a physical, actual, visible, tangible, discernible image (I'm looking at some right now). The electrons in a digital sensor do not form any image whatsoever at any time; rather, they form only a computer file comprised of a string of millions (or is it billions Mr. Advanced Degree?) of 1s and 0s. That’s not an image.
Mr. Advanced Degree.
PS. If the computer file comprised of 1s and 0s that is generated by a digicamera is an "image", as you say, why don't you just go scan one of those "images" right now and upload it for us to see? Oh, what's that? You have to first have computer software "read" the 1s and 0s in the computer file and have the software create an image? But I thought the computer file itself was an image?
I've only skimmed briefly, but I think this thread has run its course.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)