> > One of the Life magazine photo books I read once began with an > interesting thought experiment: Overlook the technical detail that > movies consist of a series of still images and imagine if still > photography had been invented *after* motion picture > photography. Think > about how amazed people would have been about the ability to freeze a > moment in time. >
I'm not sure I understand why they bring motion pictures into it. People _were_ amazed at the ability to freeze a moment in time. What has often surprised me, though, is that people seem to have been more amazed at the camera's ability to resolve detail. I suppose this is because people were used to paintings and so on (still images), but no painting had achieved the level of detail of a photograph. But then having said that I am often amazed by the realism (not necessarily detail) achieved in some oil paintings, Rembrandt being a good example. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
