Hi, > When you want to rename what the various > stops are called, you're obfuscating the reality of it.
Well, I don't want to change what the stops are called, I just want to change the ways lenses are labelled, and I've even posted a suggestion in another reply. Although I wouldn't call it obfuscation, there are plenty of situations in which we hide technical details from the end user when they don't need to know about them. High-level programming languages are an example that many people here are familiar with. How many people need to know the byte-ordering of words on chips in order to use a computer? It's not obfuscation, it's making things easier to use. > You're apparently finding some confusion factor in all this, that you > want to get around. > I think that most of those of us who understand the system, and I've > no reason to believe you are not a member of the group, feel > comfortable with it. I do feel comfortable with it, but I also remember how annoying and frustrating it was to learn. It seemed to me then that it was the equivalent of having cars set up so that when you turn the steering wheel clockwise, the car turns left. The difficulty of explaining something like this to people who are so experienced is that you may well have forgotten the annoyance of learning, and the number of frustrating mistakes you made. Not everybody perseveres through that. Instead they give up on photography and thereby lose out on a worthwhile activity. Scroll bars on Windows, Macs etc. are another example of an interface that's arse-over-tit, but which experienced people become so used to that they forget. --- Bob
