Of course the photons come up : you brought up the "real" side of this. If you want to talk about "real" objects, then you must consider what the physical manifestations of the image actually is. If you could create an atom by atom copy of a painting by Picasso, then I would argue that the two really are identical because if you turned your back I could do the shell game and you couldn't tell them aprat. A photocopy is different because it isn't a perfect copy. The problem with digital is that it actually allows you to make an essentially identical copy of the "original", and this is the first time we've really had to deal with that in the visual arts. In literature, on the other hand, Hamlet has always been "copyable".
By the way, I'm enjoying this exchnage. Don't let a forceful argument be mistaken for anger ;-) There's been too much of that lately on the list. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/23/02 01:29PM >>> 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/
