carl english
Veteran Member
sometomes I do and sometimes I don't. You say digital and I say digi.
Carl
Carl
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Why do people say copy when refering to...
- Thread starter RustyKnee
- Start date
RustyKnee
Forum Enthusiast
RustyKnee
Forum Enthusiast
jotor
Senior Member
You may well be right--I take "Natzi" from "Natzionale Socialistische".ITS **** not NATZI! Joke
But, then, I do allow for variations in grammar and spelling. ;^)
Joe
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jotor/sets/72157603857531887/show/
'Learn everything, forget everything and play'
Jimi Hendrix
I agree with others who say "knockoff" would be a good substitute for something fake, etc.
I started using "copy" because that seems to be the agreed upon lingo. I'm American but thought it was probably British. After reflecting on it, what would make more sense to me? None of the synonyms ring true:
http://encarta.msn.com/thesaurus_561569723/copy.html
"Version" might almost fit except for all the firmware updates, slight incremental changes to models (EPL1 vs. EPL1s) and so on. I guess the shortest I could say it would be "The particular EPL1 that I own..." but "copy" is short and sweet.
I had an argument with my high school English teacher about the same thing. He said it's just an expression not to be taken literally. His position is that because it's common, it's accepted as correct. Just goes to show, even teachers don't know everythingThe other one I read is "I could care less" when saying they don't care....makes no sense to me
Especially when a highly similar expression coexists (I couldn't care less), people ought to stop and think.BTW I was at the DMV yesterday. I noticed some of the windows had a sign that said "Closed." I don't mean it said
Closed
I mean it said
"Closed"
and I thought, why the quotation marks? Like it's allegedly closed or something, and if I went to that window they'd confess it wasn't really closed? Or am I supposed to hear a voice saying the word, like a quotation? All I know is, we taxpayers probably had to pay extra to have those "" engraved.
And to you, Stu!
--
Gear listed in profile under "plan."
Someone stop me before I buy again, please!
Dave
Soenda
Senior Member
Is that a copy of a Honda Accord? To my ear, that sounds pretty silly.
Personally, I think it's essentially a jargon usage that makes people feel more a part of the community of photographers. Different groups often have their own vocabulary that helps establish their identity.
I do not have a copy of a Dell Studio 1558. I have a Dell Studio 1558. And I don't have a copy of a German Shepherd. I have a German Shepherd.
I guess printed things lend themselves more to being owned as copies. I have a copy of "War and Peace" on my book shelf. I have a copy of his speech. I have a recording of Abby Road. I have a disc of a favorite movie.
But me, I have a Nikon 105mm lens.
http://www.pbase.com/soenda
Personally, I think it's essentially a jargon usage that makes people feel more a part of the community of photographers. Different groups often have their own vocabulary that helps establish their identity.
I do not have a copy of a Dell Studio 1558. I have a Dell Studio 1558. And I don't have a copy of a German Shepherd. I have a German Shepherd.
I guess printed things lend themselves more to being owned as copies. I have a copy of "War and Peace" on my book shelf. I have a copy of his speech. I have a recording of Abby Road. I have a disc of a favorite movie.
But me, I have a Nikon 105mm lens.
--
http://www.pbase.com/soenda
Andy Moreton
Well-known member
I'm a native English speaker (British) and always say 'couldn't care less'.
I am wondering whether 'could care less' is supposed to be phrased as a question - 'I could care less?'
--
Andy
I am wondering whether 'could care less' is supposed to be phrased as a question - 'I could care less?'
--
Andy
tkbslc
Forum Pro
I find it odd that someone would make a post regarding grammar and proper English and yet have multiple spelling and punctuation errors in their post. I found at least 8 obvious errors and a couple more borderline ones. Your English teacher would have marked your post with a lot of red ink....their lens or sometimes body.
To my mind copy in the context of equipment means ab imatation or reproduction, i.e. a fake lens.
I have a habit now or not reading the remains of a post as soon as I read this word used this way now.
Is it just me who fins it odd? Is it an American thing (used in normal language non photography)?
The other one I read is "I could care less" when saying they don't care....makes no sense to me
This is a web forum- a casual, informal communication medium. We talk like we are gathered in a lounge and most of use don't use the spell checker or multiple drafts before we post. As long as you know what the poster is attempting to say, it should be easy to overlook minor errors.
RustyKnee
Forum Enthusiast
Don't over react, I asked a question. Maybe not in the best way. I was quietly hoping to be convinced that the word copy is justified, or have my thoughts confirmed that it is Jargon. I was also hoping to know (again quietly) what the origin of this was and if it is a recent development.
True my english is bad, I wasn't very good at school and didn't enjoy it. To be honest I am not sure my last English teacher could care less
( A pun, but I think is true). Not blaming that soley on the teacher though. If I didn't chat to my mate and was actually interested might have helped (I prefered Physics and CDT ).I completely appeciate this. I don't think (I didn't intend to at least) to complain about grammar in general.
Minor errors I can cope with, I do them all the time. With regards to could/couldn't, I honestly accidentally drop "n't" all the time, the words in my brain lead my fingers and sometimes words or n't gets dropped. I reallise this often after posting and try to edit my post. Simply because it didn't mean what I meant. If I told the police I did kill someone, and meant didn't! I can't always be bothered to correct typos due to laziness when I think people should still understand what I meant.
The only time I quickly give up reading due to grammer is when someone doesn't use any puinctuation whats so ever. I have seen (not on this forum) posts containing several lines with out a comma or full stop.
Sorry to have caused offense by asking of why the word copy is used.
Stu
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rabbitstu77/
RustyKnee
Forum Enthusiast
I and i just reread a sentence of mine that doesn't make sense!
I didn't mean to appear to complain about grammer in general.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rabbitstu77/
I didn't mean to appear to complain about grammer in general.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rabbitstu77/
You've read Beowulf in the original Anglo-Saxon? I'd be impressed; I certainly haven't. It would be slightly more believable if you could spell "nazis" correctly - without the "t". This type of phonetic spelling mistake usually indicates the writer's relative unfamiliarity with a word in written, as opposed to spoken, form. I find it hard to imagine anyone who has achieved mastery of an archaic language but failed to attain competence in their own.You can "bla bla bla" all you want to but the fact remains that all natural languages do evolve. If you don't agree, go read Beowulf and report back.
I think the real grammar natzis are the ones who won't allow for any variation from their idea of which grammar "rules" should be followed. (Or spelling rules for that matter.)
Joe
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jotor/sets/72157603857531887/show/
'Learn everything, forget everything and play'
Jimi Hendrix
Equating evolution of language with random errors in spelling and grammar is just silly.
Roy
jotor
Senior Member
Guess I should have cited Shakespeare. I'll try to remember to not spell anything phonetically in the future, too.You've read Beowulf in the original Anglo-Saxon? I'd be impressed; I certainly haven't. It would be slightly more believable if you could spell "nazis" correctly - without the "t". This type of phonetic spelling mistake usually indicates the writer's relative unfamiliarity with a word in written, as opposed to spoken, form. I find it hard to imagine anyone who has achieved mastery of an archaic language but failed to attain competence in their own.You can "bla bla bla" all you want to but the fact remains that all natural languages do evolve. If you don't agree, go read Beowulf and report back.
I think the real grammar natzis are the ones who won't allow for any variation from their idea of which grammar "rules" should be followed. (Or spelling rules for that matter.)
Joe
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jotor/sets/72157603857531887/show/
'Learn everything, forget everything and play'
Jimi Hendrix
Equating evolution of language with random errors in spelling and grammar is just silly.
Roy
Next, I wasn't equating evolution of language with random errors in spelling and grammar, I was hoping to point out that there are variations in grammar and spelling among different groups of speakers and at different levels of usage.
Made a mess of it, didn't I? But, then, I've never claimed to have a mastery of any language.
:^)
Joe
It is really a production unit of a camera or a lens, I called it a unit. The manufacture is not copying anything, they are making completely new lenses from scratch for every unit produced.
The term is not correct. If it were a copy then there would be no problems with focusing or construction of the body. A copy is made directly from the original such as a copy on a copy machine that scans the original and makes a copy. Items produced are made from individual parts not using the "original" each time as a guide for production.
A file is copied on your computer disk drive. You copy someone's answers because your version will have the same values if you copy correctly; however, the original unit of a lens or camera is not being directly references or used in any way to produced additional units . Specifications, molds, etc. are being used to produce additional production units.
JohnK
Veteran Member
OMG, I know just what you mean, same thing with all the car analogies, check them out:
"But I then segued into Nikon DSLRs. This baby is like a Ferrari - you've got to know how to drive it to keep it on the road!
Interestingly Olympus hasn't just popped the sensor from the E-30 into a smaller body; they've been working hard under the hood too,
So while tempting, directly comparing these two cameras greatly misses the point. It is like comparing the excellent Honda Civic to a BMW 1 series.
Coming in here talking about this new camera and how it's way better is like going into a Mustang forum and talking up a storm about the new Camaro and asking who's gonna switch.
Sigma doesn't have the resources to turn out world class AF, AE, bells and whistles, and fast custom chips. So really they should just be like a muscle car--fast in a straight line.
If you're comparing two Canons, you should at least compare two Mercedes. Just as a 10D does not really compare to a 1D, a C-class compact sedan does not really compare to Mercedes's top-of-the line full-size luxury sedan, the S 600 (and/or 55 AMG). But each of those cars is still a Mercedes that is made in the same factor, just as the 10D and 1D are each Canons.
Sorry, the R1 is no Mercedes and the H1 is no Pinto!
Kinda like choosing between a BMW and a Mercedes, you can't make the wrong decision. That being said, you'd be CRAZY to choose anything but the 5D!
If Canon is the BMW and Mercedes the Nikon I definite go for the Canon
))I prefer to think of Olympus as the Mercedes-Benz of the SLR world. Classy, functional, rugged, doesn't go out of style.
Agree with you Baruth, Nikon is Lexus and Mercedes.
I want a new mercedes for $1999.- Ok what I want is faster focussing, a metal body, the sony laser AF AND NOTHING ELSE
Would you buy a Lamborghini and then pull out half the spark plug wires to save on gas? If you are spending five grand on a camera - not counting lenses - buy a few 4GB CF cards to go with it.
...20D=Boxster?
...just take a 2008 or 2009 built car. Take off the front bumpers, take off the rear bumpers, check what is behind the nice colored plastic cover, check what is built around the core motor body. What do you think you´ll find there ? All PLASTIC !! And it works !! It works so great, that you trust it even to save your life in an accident !! Now - what is wrong with plastic in a camera frame ?
The more I read about driving the feature laden car that is the 7D, the more I suspect I'll have a beast of a time getting into 3rd gear.
In reality the DSLR product is already quite mature, just like cars.
Why always Merc vs BMW. How about Audi ?
Uhm... Little fact check - Konica/Minolta/Sony(1873) was founded earlier than Canon(1937) and Nikon(1917), also Audi (1899) was founded earlier than BMW (1910).
that's what makes the 2010 Camry better than the Edsel...
Opel, the synonym of a rugged, reliable car with old school design, suddenly became the bad guy of the industry. Sheet medal thickness was critically reduced,and body-cavity sealing almost omitted, leading to rust after three years(!). In the long run until today, the brand management couldn´t compensate for the heavily damaged reputation,and Opel went through a deep, 10 year long tale of neglect, something still being witnessed today, alas a new generation seems to be on board. It´s clear now, how Sigma is able to answer all sales challenges with lower and lower prices, while still being profitable.
By that same token, why don't you, or I, drive Porsche Panamera instead of some other, 'lesser' car? Isn't a lesser car supposed to drive me from A to B using more noise, less cylinders and all in all providing a less comfortable drive?
no camera will make you a great photographer. That's like suggesting that buying a formula F1 race car will make you a great driver
when was the last time you were out with your SD14/15 or DP1/2 and saw someone else with one? it's like buying a Jaguar instead of a BMW.
I never regret that I bought DP1. However, I some time regret that I bought Peugeot 307 CC. Beautiful car but works well only in certain conditions
From what I've read, the first automobiles received the same sort of short shrift that the Foveon is, ummm... enjoying
the SD 15 may coexist alongside the SD1 for just that reason. Why buy a high performance car then drive it most of the time in 35mph speed zones?
… try to decipher a sensor data reading like S/N ratio and bit depth . Well, to be fair, its sort of like Horsepower and Torque from an automotive engine.
Its like the analogy one poster used saying "why don't we sell our modern cars and buy old ones…" My response to this is, we have ABS brakes but we don't use them every time we stop!
But, where the rubber meets the road (or more to the point where the ink hits the paper),
There is no arguing that the information captured on a Foveon imager requires processing to make a color image. But that bit of wisdom is about as astounding as saying a car requires petrol to run.
One final word of advice: Most people would never buy a car without test driving it. Yet, millions of people buy cameras every day without testing them. They simply rely on an article they have read or on something a friend or a salesperson says.
I would love to have an SD1 when it's available (just because it's going to be soooooooo cool), I should also mind my $$$ and not unecessarily overdo. (Kind of like why I don't buy a Cadillac when the Chevy will do me just fine.)"
--
JohnK
Take a picture, it'll last longer.
RustyKnee
Forum Enthusiast
I though I was in trouble when I saw OMG and the size of your post haha
Nice compilation. I remember reading a few of those on here
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rabbitstu77/
Nice compilation. I remember reading a few of those on here
--OMG, I know just what you mean, same thing with all the car analogies, check them out:
"But I then segued into Nikon DSLRs. This baby is like a Ferrari - you've got to know how to drive it to keep it on the road!
Interestingly Olympus hasn't just popped the sensor from the E-30 into a smaller body; they've been working hard under the hood too,
So while tempting, directly comparing these two cameras greatly misses the point. It is like comparing the excellent Honda Civic to a BMW 1 series.
Coming in here talking about this new camera and how it's way better is like going into a Mustang forum and talking up a storm about the new Camaro and asking who's gonna switch.
Sigma doesn't have the resources to turn out world class AF, AE, bells and whistles, and fast custom chips. So really they should just be like a muscle car--fast in a straight line.
If you're comparing two Canons, you should at least compare two Mercedes. Just as a 10D does not really compare to a 1D, a C-class compact sedan does not really compare to Mercedes's top-of-the line full-size luxury sedan, the S 600 (and/or 55 AMG). But each of those cars is still a Mercedes that is made in the same factor, just as the 10D and 1D are each Canons.
Sorry, the R1 is no Mercedes and the H1 is no Pinto!
Kinda like choosing between a BMW and a Mercedes, you can't make the wrong decision. That being said, you'd be CRAZY to choose anything but the 5D!
If Canon is the BMW and Mercedes the Nikon I definite go for the Canon
I prefer to think of Olympus as the Mercedes-Benz of the SLR world. Classy, functional, rugged, doesn't go out of style.
Agree with you Baruth, Nikon is Lexus and Mercedes.
I want a new mercedes for $1999.- Ok what I want is faster focussing, a metal body, the sony laser AF AND NOTHING ELSE
Would you buy a Lamborghini and then pull out half the spark plug wires to save on gas? If you are spending five grand on a camera - not counting lenses - buy a few 4GB CF cards to go with it.
...20D=Boxster?
...just take a 2008 or 2009 built car. Take off the front bumpers, take off the rear bumpers, check what is behind the nice colored plastic cover, check what is built around the core motor body. What do you think you´ll find there ? All PLASTIC !! And it works !! It works so great, that you trust it even to save your life in an accident !! Now - what is wrong with plastic in a camera frame ?
The more I read about driving the feature laden car that is the 7D, the more I suspect I'll have a beast of a time getting into 3rd gear.
In reality the DSLR product is already quite mature, just like cars.
Why always Merc vs BMW. How about Audi ?
Uhm... Little fact check - Konica/Minolta/Sony(1873) was founded earlier than Canon(1937) and Nikon(1917), also Audi (1899) was founded earlier than BMW (1910).
that's what makes the 2010 Camry better than the Edsel...
Opel, the synonym of a rugged, reliable car with old school design, suddenly became the bad guy of the industry. Sheet medal thickness was critically reduced,and body-cavity sealing almost omitted, leading to rust after three years(!). In the long run until today, the brand management couldn´t compensate for the heavily damaged reputation,and Opel went through a deep, 10 year long tale of neglect, something still being witnessed today, alas a new generation seems to be on board. It´s clear now, how Sigma is able to answer all sales challenges with lower and lower prices, while still being profitable.
By that same token, why don't you, or I, drive Porsche Panamera instead of some other, 'lesser' car? Isn't a lesser car supposed to drive me from A to B using more noise, less cylinders and all in all providing a less comfortable drive?
no camera will make you a great photographer. That's like suggesting that buying a formula F1 race car will make you a great driver
when was the last time you were out with your SD14/15 or DP1/2 and saw someone else with one? it's like buying a Jaguar instead of a BMW.
I never regret that I bought DP1. However, I some time regret that I bought Peugeot 307 CC. Beautiful car but works well only in certain conditions
From what I've read, the first automobiles received the same sort of short shrift that the Foveon is, ummm... enjoying
the SD 15 may coexist alongside the SD1 for just that reason. Why buy a high performance car then drive it most of the time in 35mph speed zones?
… try to decipher a sensor data reading like S/N ratio and bit depth . Well, to be fair, its sort of like Horsepower and Torque from an automotive engine.
Its like the analogy one poster used saying "why don't we sell our modern cars and buy old ones…" My response to this is, we have ABS brakes but we don't use them every time we stop!
But, where the rubber meets the road (or more to the point where the ink hits the paper),
There is no arguing that the information captured on a Foveon imager requires processing to make a color image. But that bit of wisdom is about as astounding as saying a car requires petrol to run.
One final word of advice: Most people would never buy a car without test driving it. Yet, millions of people buy cameras every day without testing them. They simply rely on an article they have read or on something a friend or a salesperson says.
I would love to have an SD1 when it's available (just because it's going to be soooooooo cool), I should also mind my $$$ and not unecessarily overdo. (Kind of like why I don't buy a Cadillac when the Chevy will do me just fine.)"
--
JohnK
Take a picture, it'll last longer.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rabbitstu77/
ScottyNV
Senior Member
The context is simply "copy of the prototype".
some copies will be closer to the reference standard than others.
quality control is simply measuring the performance or exactness of the copy to determine if it is close enough to the reference standard (prototype) to be 'in specification'.
there is no way to (at a reasonable cost, in mass production) make 'perfect' copies of the prototype.
cheers,
S.
--
beam me up captain, there's no intelligent life down here!
some copies will be closer to the reference standard than others.
quality control is simply measuring the performance or exactness of the copy to determine if it is close enough to the reference standard (prototype) to be 'in specification'.
there is no way to (at a reasonable cost, in mass production) make 'perfect' copies of the prototype.
cheers,
S.
--
beam me up captain, there's no intelligent life down here!
TrapperJohn
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 16,488
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 12,288
And why were the molds, and machining instructions developed?
To duplicate the original prototype. To make a copy of it. Lots of copies of it.
And you don't copy a file on your computer, you instruct the operating system to activate its copy routine, so some processing is being performed there. Photocopy? You're using machinery to illuminate the original, and focus the light onto a transfer belt to selectively remove a static charge. (actually, most copiers scan and render these days) Duplicating an item is copying it, some forms of copying are more complex than others.
I don't refer to my lenses as copies, I think of them as freaking expensive things that consume far too much of what little disposable income I have.
To duplicate the original prototype. To make a copy of it. Lots of copies of it.
And you don't copy a file on your computer, you instruct the operating system to activate its copy routine, so some processing is being performed there. Photocopy? You're using machinery to illuminate the original, and focus the light onto a transfer belt to selectively remove a static charge. (actually, most copiers scan and render these days) Duplicating an item is copying it, some forms of copying are more complex than others.
I don't refer to my lenses as copies, I think of them as freaking expensive things that consume far too much of what little disposable income I have.
René Schuster
Forum Pro
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum