How Analog is silver imaging really?

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Not even that (string theory).

Cheers,

Roger

Awwww..... The pain!

 

[Papa Tango]

And at the end of the day, none of it makes a damned bit of difference.

 

[Daniel_OB]

If filters, or like, make just anything with reality in photography
what you see when you get sunglasses on? If it is not reality any more, please test it between rails when you see the train is coming. Do not worry it is not reality, just a small test.
When ever such a topic comes guys run into metaphisic and go up to black hole with "philosophy". But we forget what are properties of photography are: say outline (no details at all within and no hand ever can make it).
What is photography concerning "reality" you need not a long: just think when, why, and who invented photography. That should be enough.

End for Roger H.: the moment when a driver turned away is a real moment. The truck was where it was, your coment is just a reason why truck was there (i can add one more example: what it will looks like if there was no trafic light where photo camera is pointed? but the light is there, so). The scene was a true moment in this universe, and you snapped it.

www.Leica-R.com

 

[DannL]

Is sheet music analog or digital?

I must admit I find this subject frustrating. I would love to crush the toes of the person that first attached the word "analog" with the word "photography". In my opinion there is nothing analog about photography. To me the word "analog" simply does not fit the subject in this case. Nor can I justify this word usage by referring to it's definition in the dictionary. Why do we continue to propagate this usage of the word?

What is the specific definition of Analog Photography? When did Analog Photography first appear?

I spent a majority of my career in electronics. Analog as used in electronics simply means the voltage in the circuit varies over time, as in the voltage in an analog amplifier or analog signal. Digital on the other hand, another class of circuit, uses positive/negative/zero voltage (sometimes called 1's and 0's) to represent a specific state or condition. Digital works well for representing numbers electrically.

My only explanation as to why someone word use the adjective "analog" with the noun "photography" is for the lack of a better word to define "non-digital photographic techniques". "Analog" probably sounded good to that individual.

IMHO sheet music is "printed music notation". Analog does not fit.

 

[copake_ham]

I must admit I find this subject frustrating. I would love to crush the toes of the person that first attached the word "analog" with the word "photography". In my opinion there is nothing analog about photography. To me the word "analog" simply does not fit the subject in this case. Nor can I justify this word usage by referring to it's definition in the dictionary. Why do we continue to propagate this usage of the word?

What is the specific definition of Analog Photography? When did Analog Photography first appear?

I spent a majority of my career in electronics. Analog as used in electronics simply means the voltage in the circuit varies over time, as in the voltage in an analog amplifier or analog signal. Digital on the other hand, another class of circuit, uses positive/negative/zero voltage (sometimes called 1's and 0's) to represent a specific state or condition. Digital works well for representing numbers electrically.

My only explanation as to why someone word use the adjective "analog" with the noun "photography" is for the lack of a better word to define "non-digital photographic techniques". "Analog" probably sounded good to that individual.

IMHO sheet music is "printed music notation". Analog does not fit.

Strictly in the sense of a defined term - I agree with you that analog photography versus it's digital counterpart is not as clear a distinction between them as is found in analog and digital electronic circuitry. Not the least of which, the use of term "analog" in photography probably post-dates to the introduction of the digital version as opposed to the usage in electronics.

But the term "analog" has come into generally-accepted usage as a means of making the distinction between the two forms of photography. Language in every day usage is not precise and English, especially, is very flexible. A brief search of this site will find at least a half dozen threads on English usage, it's oddities and quirks etc.

What it comes down to is that on APUG the term "analog" has come be generally-accepted as referring to the various aspects of "traditional" (to use another "loaded" term) film photography.

 

[Ole]

Light is discontinuous anyway, once you get down small enough. There's either a photon or there isn't (except when you try to detemine whether or not there is one), so in a way all photography is digital.

 

[Daniel_OB]

DannL
you all right. There is none photography deals with analog...

By the way analog refer to continuous functions, while digital to discontinuous. E.g. sine line is continuous fuction, weather forecast is discontinuous (interupted) function (there is a jump).

How it came to photography to get that tail I can see only one single reason: to get involved into photography one need to spend around $50 for a camera and to became a pro $50 more to register a company. It is mass thinking. To became a doctor is very different so no analog medicine, analog engineering,...
World and people today are very strange.

Ole
Light is of dual nature: wave and corpuscule (mass). End more, light matter is still not clear and to responsible scientists. Secondary photography as art medium do not deals to such extend as you try to show it. Moving of electron around nucleus is continuous so light is "ANaloG"... Again it is stupid to extend photography at such level. It is matter of solid state phisic not for photography.

Copake-ham
you just proved what I wrote above. Thanks.

www.Leica-R.com

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

What is the specific definition of Analog Photography? When did Analog Photography first appear?

(...)

My only explanation as to why someone word use the adjective "analog" with the noun "photography" is for the lack of a better word to define "non-digital photographic techniques". "Analog" probably sounded good to that individual.

Since you answered your own question, I'll just tell a small anecdote about myself: when I decided to start investing a bit more than disposable cameras for photography, I was facing the digital/film dilemma. Luckily, because I was working in a (crappy) software shop then, I felt compelled to stay away from the computer. So I went with film.

As this was around 2003, where most people who acquired their first cameras were buying digital ones, I felt the need to justify myself, and started telling people I was doing analog photography. Covert prestige and all that. I felt incredibly smart for having invented that turn of phrase. Then for fun I decided to Google it.

Duh.

And that's how I found APUG. Morality: yes it's not a technically proper term, but it's one that is meaningful enough that pompous youngsters like me will eventually learn that they have not invented hot water. And find a lot of good things as payback for some humility.

 

[DBP]

Let's face it, if we called it "metal salts based photography" no one would know what we meant. And our acronym would need more vowels.

 

[DannL]

Since you answered your own question, I'll just tell a small anecdote about myself: . . .

That was just my opinion, and not the answer.

And that's how I found APUG. Morality: yes it's not a technically proper term, but it's one that is meaningful enough that pompous youngsters like me will eventually learn that they have not invented hot water. And find a lot of good things as payback for some humility.

How did you fit the definition of "analog" to describe an aspect of photography? In other words . . . what aspect about the word "analog" describes something found traditional photography? Serious question.

 

[roteague]

I must admit I find this subject frustrating. I would love to crush the toes of the person that first attached the word "analog" with the word "photography". In my opinion there is nothing analog about photography.

I'm an electrical engineer by training, and I have no problem with the term as it applies to photography.

 

[Chan Tran]

I am also uncomfortable with the term Analog Photography. I really don't want to say it's wrong. As for the question of whether "Sheet music analog or digital", again I don't feel right to call it either but sheet music is closer to digital than analog because it just a set of symbols used to describe the music and not the music itself. Sheet music often can not describe fully what the musician wants. It's a language like our written and spoken words.

 

[Daniel_OB]

Roteague
I had 2 hours training in law. So as a top-notch lawyer I can also say it is all OK from law stand point.

Have a nice day

 

[DannL]

I'm an electrical engineer by training, and I have no problem with the term as it applies to photography.

Okay. Define it without making reference to electrical properties.

"Analog Photography". What exactly is it? :rolleyes:

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

That was just my own opinion, and not an answer.



How did you fit the definition of "analog" to describe an aspect of photography? In other words . . . what aspect about the word "analog" describes something found traditional photography? Serious question.

Well, I guess it's just that because of audio, people have been seeing the words "digital" and "analog" as a pair of opposites. The established vocabulary just transferred itself to the photographic world. The transition of audio to digital just provided a template for apprehending the transition happening in photography.

"Analog" works metonymically. It's like when people in Québec use "chauffer (to heat)" for "conduire (to drive)". The "chauffer" verb comes probably from the train transportation vocabulary: in a steam locomotive, there is a driver and a pot-boiler. So when we are "heating" the car, we are not literally lighting a fire underneath the motor, we're just driving the car by using vocabulary from another domain.

 

[roteague]

Okay. Define it without making reference to electrical properties.

"Analog Photography". What exactly is it? :rolleyes:

Film.

 

[DannL]

Well, I guess it's just that because of audio, people have been seeing the words "digital" and "analog" as a pair of opposites. The established vocabulary just transferred itself to the photographic world. The transition of audio to digital just provided a template for apprehending the transition happening in photography.

"Analog" works metonymically. . . . .

I'm not qualified to qualify your reply, but IMHO this is the finest answer I've read yet. Although several have come extremely close to stating the same.

Film.

Ahhh, a man of few words. So, what aspect of film is analog?

 

[roteague]

I'm not qualified to qualify your reply, but IMHO this is the finest answer I've read yet. Although several have come extremely close to stating the same.



Ahhh, a man of few words. So, what aspect of film is analog?

Its continuous nature. Analog can refer to chemical processes, which is what film is.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

I'm not qualified to qualify your reply, but IMHO this is the finest answer I've read yet. Although several have come extremely close to stating the same.

Why, thank you!

 

[DannL]

Its continuous nature. Analog can refer to chemical processes, which is what film is.

I'm sorry Bob, you're gonna hate me . . .

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Analog

I should have gone out with my "Analog Camera" and taken some "Analog Photographs", but instead I found myself hopelessly buried in this "Analog Thread" with no way to save face. I should have kept my analog trap shut, don't you think? Look what it got me.

Hey! I got it. Analog is a "variable" word. Good for anything.

 

[roteague]

I'm sorry Bob, you're gonna hate me . . .

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Analog

I should have gone out with my "Analog Camera" and taken some "Analog Photographs", but instead I found myself hopelessly buried in this "Analog Thread" with no way to save face. I should have kept my analog trap shut, don't you think? Look what it got me.

Hey! I got it. Analog is a "variable" word. Good for anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_(chemistry)

 

[DannL]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_(chemistry)

Stop it! That definition has nothing to do with photography. Nothing whatsoever. Did you even read the definition of an analog as it is found in chemistry? You should be ashamed of yourself. Go ahead, keep it up . . . Robert. One more attempt to misguide this class and I have everyone on the forum doing 100 push-ups. And guess who they'll have to thank for it.

 

[copake_ham]

Stop it! That definition has nothing to do with photography. Nothing whatsoever. Did you even read the definition of an analog as it is found in chemistry? You should be ashamed of yourself. Go ahead, keep it up . . . Robert. One more attempt to misguide this class and I have everyone on the forum doing 100 push-ups. And guess who they'll have to thank for it.

Can I be really quite honest with you?

You really are beginning to act like a troll on this thread.

I think you well and fully understand what folks here mean by the term "analog photography". I think it has been well explained by decent folk trying to take you and your queries at face value.

You just seem to want to "beat it to death" for the sake of argument.

Why? What are you trying to achieve by doing this?

As far as folk here are concerned "analog photography" is a term of art:

It entails using a relatively small aperture opening that, triggered by a shutter, exposes by transmission of photons, renderings of objects that are in front thereof such that they are projected upon one of various photon-sensitive, chemical-based media. This is call "exposure". The chemical media so exposed to the photons is commonly referred to as "film".

Thereupon, this film or similar media requires development and "fixing" in chemical solutions. This development process is conducted in darkness (to prevent infiltration of other photons on the still photon-sensitive media) in order to render a final picture that can be viewed in ordinary light without further being altered by exposure to it. The resulting picture is an image upon the film (or similar) media itself.

Processing under "light-controlled" conditions can then be performed to further render the image onto different, initially chemical-sensitive media including various forms of light sensitive papers. These papers, like the film media, can then be "fixed" such that they can be viewed under ordinary light conditions without being further "altered".

Now, this is nothing but a quick and incomplete description; but it is what we here call "analog photography".

And, in all honesty, I really couldn't give a darn if you don't like the term - so what? Who put you in charge?

 

[keithwms]

LOL

Funny thread. Actually I don't think DannL is trolling, I think he may have a point.

DannL it's the continuous tone aspect that underlies "analogue"; one could argue that film captures a nondenumerably infinite number of tones between black and white, and without discontinuities. It's not quite true but it is an essentially infinite tone palette. With digital one can of course compute the finite number of possible gradations from the bit level.

Now, whether the eye can actually distinguish between continous tone and almost-continuous tone is another subject

Anyway, "analogue" actually has nothing to do with chemicals and all that. You could in principle construct a camera with purely analogue electronic photosites; the photocurrent is, after all, a rather continuous function of the photon flux, as long as you're within certain range of wavelength sensitivity i.e. away from some unfortunate band edge. But... it's when you dump analogue photosensor data to an ADC, that's when you'd get the tone posterization. No? (EE experts feel free to jump in and correct me...) So what I am saying is that analogue simply means that the signal hasn't gone through an ADC. The ADC is what makes the tone scale discontinuous. Yes, that's it, we are here to resist global domination by the ADC, that's why we call outselves "analogue."

P.S. I find the aspect of counting tones less important in terms of actual output than the overall gentler transitions to highlights that one achieves with film. As you know, it's just far too easy to go to #FFFFFF with digital, so one has to sweat the capture and then sweat the curves in postprocessing to get it right. (All the hooplah about the fuji s3 and s5 having better range, but look, you only get about one more stop of highlight tolerance! But I digress.)

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

* Analog is a misnomer
* Continuous tone is an illusion

Personally I like George's definition better: CHEMICAL photography, as opposed to ELECTRONIC photography. End of story.