Reading mode: Light Dark

Shouldn't we ban "photography" and "photographer"...

Go to last post
JJGP said:
It's not a stupid question.
Click to expand...
It's not a "stupid" question but it sure is an ill informed question.

It doesn't matter what medium you're using, you're still a photographer. The medium isn't what makes you a photographer, it's the action.

We have stock car racers and we have dirt car racers and we have super modified racers. But they're all racing automobiles, but none would be used to commute to work or would be considered street legal.

You're pushing too hard in your attempt to be simplistic as the rest of the world around you is more complex. Everything around you comprises of compound words and descriptive terminology.

If you want to create a new term go for it. That's how change comes about but don't be surprised if it doesn't stick:-)

On the otherhand, maybe I'll be surprised and it will stick.

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me:-)
 
Ger Bee said:
But already a few are in fact calling themselves digigraphers. But
to ban someone for their beliefs in film and the possibility that
we evolved from film might be hearsay and you could be slaughtered
on the high alter in ritual sacrifice.
Click to expand...
Get a rope! :-)

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me:-)
 
Barrie Davis said:
I have never referred to my pictures as "Photos", though. That term
does make me cringe, for some reason!
Click to expand...
I've always refered to them as prints. You printed the image/light onto the paper in the darkroom with aid of an enlarger or today, you print the image onto the paper with aid of a "printer".

So in the end, from the beginning and continuing into today, you print the information onto the paper and the final product is called a print.

So in my mind, nothing's really changed as the print is the final goal, not the process that leads up to the final product.

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me:-)
 
How about: "Photolexe(i)graphy"??? Just checked the web, the word "lexe" is an adjective for digital (in modern Greek).

It would differentiate between film and digital photography, but will still give a clue as to what we are talking about.

As for "imaging": the term is modern, cool-sounding, etc., but it is discriminative, because "imaging" is an English term. In German it would be "Blicknung", in Polish "obrazowanie", and I don't know about other languages. Photography derives from Greek, not favouring anyone, not even western world, as it is not in Latin. Imaging can also be done without a digital camera, like with a mouse, by using painting tools, as with Corel PhotoPaint (Photoshop is no good to create drawings/paintings yourself).
 
Thomas Gardner said:
Barrie Davis said:
I have never referred to my pictures as "Photos", though. That term
does make me cringe, for some reason!
Click to expand...
I've always refered to them as prints. You printed the image/light
onto the paper in the darkroom with aid of an enlarger or today,
you print the image onto the paper with aid of a "printer".

So in the end, from the beginning and continuing into today, you
print the information onto the paper and the final product is
called a print.

So in my mind, nothing's really changed as the print is the final
goal, not the process that leads up to the final product.

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me:-)
Click to expand...
Which brings us to the term "printer", which has been used incorrectly ever since photography arrived. For one thing, 'print' is a word that means an "imprinted image", by applying "pressure", a direct translation of the word "Drucker", "Printer" in German, in where printing was invented. "Druck" in German also means "pressure". When emulsion photography was invented, first images were referred to as "photos", but when photography found its use in books and newspapers, it suddenly appeared it can be used in printing as well, so thus the phrase "photographic print" appeared. It was quickly shortened to "print", but that term is wrong as it does not take pressure to make a photography.

Modern bubblejet, pressurejet and thermosublimation printers also don't apply pressure to the imprinted surface. They are not printers sensu stricte, but we also use the term. Has it never dawned to any of you that we should not use the term "printer", but rather "imager", "picturer", or anything different than a term that has been in use for more than 5 centuries??? Oh, it's so anachronic. An archaic term. We should ban it! Have you ever heard that? I haven't.

If a name has been around for that long without any changes, why change nomology of something that has been around for less than two centuries? I see no point.

Let's go further. Bubblejet printers are around for more than 20 years. CCD elements have been introduced as AF sensors in less than 20 years (Minolta 7000). And as for imagers - well, I've seen 1997/98 catalogues recently that featured first digital cameras. And, oh boy, what resolution they had! It was 640x480, an absolute pinnacle of technology, available as low as $500. Amateur only. Pros could not use digital, as image quality was completely unsatisfactory. Oh, there were also 320x240 cameras that cost around $400...
 
This is in response to the first post in the thread:

The government in Canada decided that the word "marriage" should include now two persons and not a man and a woman.
Most of the population seems to be opposed to the idea of using that word.

You can propose any new names you want, or rename things as they are, but unless this is a root movement , it will not change.
It is the usage and not individuals who make language changes.

I have a digital G3 abd an film Nikon, what am I?

I also take film pictures, scan the negatives and work on them digitally. What am I then?

Leave the good old words alone, we are all photographers. If yo want to call yourself something different, go ahead. If nobody knows what you are talking about, that is also O.K.

Rgds
 
JJGP said:
because for the last 100 years or so, they've been associated with
film. And since this is a Dig. imaging website, shouldn't we
delegate new terms.
jules
Click to expand...
Aren't "light images" what is being made, no matter what the receiving medium? Or should the term "photographer" only apply to people exposing glass plates? After all, those were the first "photographers."

Come to think of it, exposures onto silicon sensor arrays is a lot closer to glass plates than that chemical layer applied to acetate or mylar flexi-strips.

-iNova (photon wrangler)
--
http://www.digitalsecrets.net
 
light (compared to film). As soon as the light contacts the sensor, minute electrical currents (signals) are created. From there on, its all millivolts, microvolts, micro & milliamps, logic circuits etc...who knows what!

Secondly, anyone flying a plane is called pilot. But someone flying a shuttle is called an astronaut. And, as far as I'm concerned, if you own a digital camera, you've got the universe at your doorstep.

Third...suppose you just finished a days work & you decide to go to "Joe's steak & beer house". While there, you meet someone & you ask him/her what he/she does for a living....he/she answers, "I'm a photographer".......I bet you a thousand dollars that I can figure out what your question will be. Dollars to doghnuts, you will ask him/her, "Do you shoot film or digital" Right? Now, if the person you met told you that he/she was an imographer, you would know right off the bat what kind of tools they have.
Shucks, enough said
jules
 
JJGP said:
Third...suppose you just finished a days work & you decide to go to
"Joe's steak & beer house". While there, you meet someone & you
ask him/her what he/she does for a living....he/she answers, "I'm a
photographer".......I bet you a thousand dollars that I can figure
out what your question will be. Dollars to doghnuts, you will ask
him/her, "Do you shoot film or digital" Right?
Click to expand...
You've got ta be kidding. You really think anybody at "Joe's steak & beer house" gives a rat's patootie what you're using?

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

You tell people you're a photographer, they know exactly what you are. "Oh cool, you actually can make a living taking pictures." More then likely the "real" next question will be..... "What kinda pictures do you take?" Not, what kind of camera do you use.

I can just see the questions coming fast and furious after you tell the patron at the bar you're a photographer. "Ah do you use a SLR or a DSLR. "What brand do you use?" "Is there benefit to using the higher priced lenses and why do some spell it lense instead of lens." "What post processing program do you use?" "Do you find that BiCubic is better in reresizing an image or do you like Genuine Fractals?" "Do you use stairstepping or do you resize in one fell swoop?" "Do you use any other programs or just the one postprocessing program?" "What settings do you use when you USM your images?"

Just to give you a clue, few people anywhere even know professional digital equipment exists.

Just tell them your a photographer, you'll do just fine but if you try to get high falootin in "Joe's steak & beer house", you're lible to get thrown out on your ear. Why? The people at "Joe's steak & beer house" don't like high falootin people that try to be fancy pants in their choice of words.

Good luck with your endevor/mission.

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me:-)
 
Thomas,

A wise man once said: "Never go into discussion with someone stupid: he will take you down to his level and beat you with his experience"

greets,

Willem
Thomas Gardner said:
JJGP said:
Third...suppose you just finished a days work & you decide to go to
"Joe's steak & beer house". While there, you meet someone & you
ask him/her what he/she does for a living....he/she answers, "I'm a
photographer".......I bet you a thousand dollars that I can figure
out what your question will be. Dollars to doghnuts, you will ask
him/her, "Do you shoot film or digital" Right?
Click to expand...
You've got ta be kidding. You really think anybody at "Joe's steak
& beer house" gives a rat's patootie what you're using?

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

You tell people you're a photographer, they know exactly what you
are. "Oh cool, you actually can make a living taking pictures."
More then likely the "real" next question will be..... "What kinda
pictures do you take?" Not, what kind of camera do you use.

I can just see the questions coming fast and furious after you tell
the patron at the bar you're a photographer. "Ah do you use a SLR
or a DSLR. "What brand do you use?" "Is there benefit to using
the higher priced lenses and why do some spell it lense instead of
lens." "What post processing program do you use?" "Do you find
that BiCubic is better in reresizing an image or do you like
Genuine Fractals?" "Do you use stairstepping or do you resize in
one fell swoop?" "Do you use any other programs or just the one
postprocessing program?" "What settings do you use when you USM
your images?"

Just to give you a clue, few people anywhere even know professional
digital equipment exists.

Just tell them your a photographer, you'll do just fine but if you
try to get high falootin in "Joe's steak & beer house", you're
lible to get thrown out on your ear. Why? The people at "Joe's
steak & beer house" don't like high falootin people that try to be
fancy pants in their choice of words.

Good luck with your endevor/mission.

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me:-)
Click to expand...
 
What JJGP wrote is a very Canadian thing. We in Canada tend to look for nonsense where there isn't one. When we "discover" that nonsense, we glorify it and preach its gospel.
Example: Bilingualism

Fact: There are more people who give English as their first language in the province of Quebec than people who give French as their first language in the rest of Canada ( To non-believers: this is Statistics Canada info).

Yet , this country is totally bilingual, with EVERY government office in the whole country manned by bilingual personnel (read: Quebecers).

My Canon G3 manual had over 300 pages of French Manual, 90% of those go in the garbage the day they are bought (manuals).

Also, the province of Quebec does not allow English on road signs (yes!!), on any commercial establishments, French lettering must be at least double the size of English, Businesses with English-origin names (say: Shoeless Joe) are forced to change their name to French or go through a court battle to keep their name.

Having this background in mind, JJGP's post begins to get clarity.
Rgds
 
MarekM said:
What JJGP wrote is a very Canadian thing. We in Canada tend to look
for nonsense where there isn't one. When we "discover" that
nonsense, we glorify it and preach its gospel.
Example: Bilingualism
Fact: There are more people who give English as their first
language in the province of Quebec than people who give French as
their first language in the rest of Canada ( To non-believers: this
is Statistics Canada info).

Yet , this country is totally bilingual, with EVERY government
office in the whole country manned by bilingual personnel (read:
Quebecers).
My Canon G3 manual had over 300 pages of French Manual, 90% of
those go in the garbage the day they are bought (manuals).
Also, the province of Quebec does not allow English on road signs
(yes!!), on any commercial establishments, French lettering must be
at least double the size of English, Businesses with English-origin
names (say: Shoeless Joe) are forced to change their name to French
or go through a court battle to keep their name.

Having this background in mind, JJGP's post begins to get clarity.
Rgds
Click to expand...
-- I hope you can find an appropriate place to express your political views. I'm fairly certain they hold only marginal interest on this international photography forum.

Jim Rickards
fellow Canadian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top