----- Original Message -----
From: "Cory Papenfuss"
Subject: Re: 645D Musings
>>
> Maybe the difference is that when I read something and quote it as
> something I read from someone else, I am referring to objective numbers.
> Things like resolution and color accuracy can be quantified absolutely, so
> I feel relatively justified in paraphrasing the information. I will not,
> however, forward interpretation-based information such as "XYZ technology
> has a warmer color," "The bokeh of lens XYZ has a dreamy quality," or
> "Medium format is better for portraiture" without attributing the
> source. Those meanings are non-transferrable. :)
>
Interpretative, or qualitative properties are just as important as that
which can be qualified absolutely, simply because photography is a
qualitative medium.
There are linguistic shorthands that we use to describe that which is
qualititative in nature ("dreamy bokeh" is a good example, and one which I
can visualize easily), and to fully realize the art and craft of
photography, one needs to have the visual education that allows
understanding of this sort of terminology.
Qualitative understanding is more important than the numbers game that
photography has been steered towards since the invention of the film
scanner, since ultimately, it is the qualitative that is put on display.
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
