I was just waiting for the Photon argument to crop up again... A very literal and limited interpretation.
Yes, it's all photons. That's why a Picasso is no different than a photocopy - both photon stuff. --- Steve Desjardins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "But they are not both resultant from light falling > on > "real" objects. Film is a real object. When a > computer translates something into data it is no > longer a "real" object but anonymous data." > > > It is always a real object in either case. In both > cases, photons have > fallen on a physical object and the way this object > responds is what > records the image. The only difference with the CCD > sensor is that the > process can be reversed easily so that the sensor > can be used again. I > reject the idea, however, that either of these > processes ever deals with > "disembodied" data. The data is always encoded on > some physical object, > be it a silver compound, a silicon chip, ink on > paper, or a retina. In > the digital case, it is simply more obvious that > some of these encoding > stages are in a form not directly visible to the > human eye, like > unprocessed film. In both cases, you must follow a > precise set of steps > to correctly "develop" the initial recording into a > visible image. > > > Steven Desjardins > Department of Chemistry > Washington and Lee University > Lexington, VA 24450 > (540) 458-8873 > FAX: (540) 458-8878 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ===== Chaso DeChaso "Less is more cheap" - Osvaldo Valdes, Architect __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
