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
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
Very good point!
Steve Desjardins wrote:
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.
3 matches
Mail list logo
