I must have hit my head and come awake in 1999.
At 08:27 PM 8/20/2004, you wrote:
Oh Boy Here We Go Again.............
Russ R.E. Baker Photography rebphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Feed a Cat... Starve a Fever........
steves wrote:
>Normal lenses introduce light in a sort of cone shaped projection against >the film plane, while digital lenses should and now do project the light in >parallel almost a rectangular shaped prjoection that fall upon the chip. > > Friends, as I wonder at the Democrats, I also wonder where I am.
Is it digital that has caused us to see politicians in a new light? Once we leave behind the true trustworthyness of the field camera for something which makes its own interpretation, the slippery slope must be where we are heading.
I trust my Nikon, my 43 - 86mm lens and my own eye. For as surely as 35mm is the format that has been agreed on as closest to the eye, it gives me the truest interpretation of the field.
And now we hear that the very lenses we as photographers have placed our creative trust in have also been digitized. Like the cones in our eyes, is not the cone of light from our lens also a fundamental fact of nature? Or have those we trust become so digitized that we lose the truth of the lens?
Bob
Jeff Spirer
Photos: http://www.spirer.com
One People: http://www.onepeople.com/
Surfaces and Marks: http://www.withoutgrass.com
