On Tue, 2002-08-20 at 22:56, Robert Soames Wetmore wrote: > Well, that's if a camera is primarily an object of contemplation or > perception, rather than something to be handled.
There's an interesting article by DA Norman, author of "The Design of Everyday Things" at http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/Emotion-and-design.html. He argues that "attractive things work beter". (This from an author who used to be accused of elevating function of aesthetics). Basically, one's emotional state has a huge impact on how one uses a tool. If one is stressed, one focusses better, but also less likely to be creative, and more likely to trip over idiosyncracies in the interface. If one is in a good mood, one is more creative in one's use of the tool, and more likely to forgive their ideosyncracies. Quotable quote: "Wash and polish your car: doesn't it drive better?" The point, for me? Liking the feel of a camera, PS-1p or MZ-S, may be just as important an interface feature as, say, shutter lag and placement. But we all knew that already :-) -- ,_ /_) /| / / i e t e r / |/ a g e l http://www.nagel.co.za - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
