John Rudiak (wizard@laplaza.org)
Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:41:11 -0700
Ya know, I am actually kind of refreshed by the continuous tone discussion, as it
involved some interpretattion of scientific theory as related to photography.
Also some humor, where the original person who asked for peoples concept of
"continuous tone" (on two occasions) stated yesterday that the discussion was
basically BS, opinion formed as near as i could tell because people spent time
trying to refute his position.
At least it was good clean entertainment.
The discusssion could continue until someone says something like "Of course there
is no continuous tone, because alll the materials are made of atoms, ultimately,
which are essentially particles with spaces between them, so if you blow the
material up enough, it is not continuous"
Oh darn, I ended it.
John
FotoDave@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 99-01-12 23:47:24 EST, glaughter@earthlink.net writes:
>
> > Has this now become a list for splitting hairs, proving micro points and
> > beating dead horses? Is this now a list with an attitude?
> >
>
> Gene,
>
> You didn't specifically mention any thread, discussion, or person, but from
> the latest traffic I think it is the "continous tone" thread that is bothering
> you and/or others. Since I was quite involved in the discussion, I think I
> should explain a little.
>
> I have been interested in the continous-tone versus digital negatives for a
> long time. About half a year ago there was a brief discussion, but we never
> got into details. This time we did get into some very technical stuffs, which
> interested me a lot but maybe are irrelavant to others; but I wasn't trying to
> argue just for the argument sake.
>
> There seems to be some important differences between contone and digital
> negatives which will affect how we control the print and how the print will
> look (I used "seems" because I cannot be 100% sure, and that's why I want to
> ask questions). Perhaps others are not doing digital so it won't interest them
> at all.
>
> The problem is not the discussion itself. If people are not interested in the
> discussion, or if there isn't enough people with the same background to
> participate in the discussion, the thread will die away itself. The problem is
> some seem to get upset when a view is taken but a different view is pointed
> out.
>
> Maybe you (and hopefully others) will understand me when I post my questions
> about contone vs. digital.
>
> Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:42