Kirk Keyes
Member
Think of a pinhole as a special case of a lens where the thickness of the lens element is infinitely thin.
Think of a pinhole as a special case of a lens where the thickness of the lens element is infinitely thin.
Does this mean that all those famous photographers that don't print their own work are not photographers after all?
And that those printers who never leave the darkroom to see the world through their own eyes are in fact (the only) photographers?
I think the word "photograph" is a general term.
The image forming process in pinhole photography involves nothing that even with the richest of imaginations could be construed as focusing light.
I was going to stay out of this thread, but a hole does focus light, it's simple physics, it creates a limiting factor that forces diffused rays of light to become straighter. The smaller the whole, the straighter they become.
... that forces diffused rays of light to become straighter.
It's already been shown that Q.G. obviously doesn't know what he's talking about. He is just a troll. Please don't feed them.
Actually the materials are the only criteria that can be objectively defined. Anything else is subjective.
Light hitting a sensor or film does not create a photograph, it creates a latent image or in the case of a sensor it creates an analog signature that through other means, analog or digital, can be interpreted as an image. One can create an analog image through entirely electronic means. I used to do it every day. At no point did anybody lucid ever consider those electronic analog images to be photographs, even though the images were both originated with light and entirely analog. An image is not a photograph. An image can be used to create many things, including a photograph, but the information contained in a negative or file isn't a photograph. It doesn't matter one iota about where light was involved prior to the creation of the artifact called a photograph. Light and the interpretation of light is always involved in anything visual, painting, sculpture, or whatnot. A photograph is a physical object, a print is a description of a type of physical object that can include a photograph, inkjet, gum print, etc. A photograph is not in the strictest sense a print, just as a gum print is not in the strictest sense a photograph. Inkjet prints however, are quite clearly prints because "printing" simply describes a mechanical creation or replication of an image, something the creation of an inkjet print has in abundance, while conversely at no point does the creation of an inkjet print involve light. Witness an inkjet print that contains only text or CGI for reference. I or anybody else can easily make an inkjet print without light, all I need is information, and the printer cares not a bit how it was originated, manipulated or organised. I can not on the other hand make a photograph without light, no matter how my information is originated, manipulated or organized. Photographs are and always will be physical artifacts that are contain information inscribed by light on a substrate thereby rendering a visible image, except of course to the word crafter or ignoramus, or perhaps those with a misguided and thoroughly vested self interest.
In the Q.G. world the definition of "photograph" is, by necessity, broad (what it does, not what it is). If an inkjet print behaves in some way like a photograph, it must be one, and that interpretation serves to make him right.
It's already been shown that Q.G. obviously doesn't know what he's talking about. He is just a troll. Please don't feed them.
Whoa... I, for one,
found merit in a number of his contentions.
some people see better when they squint, or look through a pin hole.
True. But in those cases, the word does not mean "photograph" but means a picture captured (at least initially!) by a camera. We do this sort of thing all the time... We use the word "ship" to mean send. Shipping charges are collected even if the item is delivered by truck! One might say they are being "sloppy" and not coosing the proper word for the job, but someone else might say the word has acquired more than one meaning....
Unles they take the lens out of their eyes first, what they do is use a smaller aperture.
And that does what it always does: increase DoF. Helps when you are short- or far sighted.![]()
Hey, your argument is with the Editorial Board
of the OED, not with me... There is no foundation in usage or logic for
arbitrarily freezing and confining the definition of
"photograph" to Jason's definition.
![]()
But if you asked them they would probably tell you that everything seems to be in "better focus".
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY: ![]() |