Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/03/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thank you Vick. Speaking of the Hubble telescope; the first images taken on orbit revealed fuzzy pictures. After hours of panick and discussions it was discovered someone had simply forgotten to take notes after all calculations had been finished and no controls had been made during the final mountings on earth. Hubble could simply not adjust to infinity by only a few millimeters or was so to say nearsighted. No insurance company would accept to pay for this because it was the clients own fault (the Lloyds of London if I remember). They had to start a new study and remake all calculations with no Hubble at hand to check everything and send another expedition with high level specialists and additional mirrors to try to correct this problem. Thanks God it worked and everything was done to forged this blunder I cannot, even being a professor of optcs and photography, think of develloping B&W and color and certainly enlarging prints, without taking notes. It's the same wen I use one software or another to make corrections for digital images, especially when filtering. Regards Cedric 2013/3/24 Vick Ko <vick.ko at sympatico.ca>: > Yeah, Nathan > > It was interesting that I was browsing the "Photolife" magazine, a magazine > clearly created by the equipment manufacturers and sellers. > > Every photo was followed with lens, camera, setting, and some post > processing notes. > > Made me think that the only purpose was to capture the crowd that is > thinking "if I buy that lens and camera, I can create that photo too". > > And I also heard an artist's talk today, about "The Night sky". He was > telling about one of the amazing "Hubble photos", that it was more a > testimony to man's genius in creating a camera called the "Hubble > telescope", but comparing to his shot of the Milky way, taken at late > night, > over Lake Superior. The Milky way shot evoked much more a sense of > connection and "one with nature", because it didn't take a gizillion > dollars > of research and the most unique camera made by man to take. I don't even > know what camera he used to make the Milky way photo. But it was as > stunning as the Hubble photo. > > And with all that I've said, I'm guilty of being under the influence of > "the > tech notes". I latched onto Leica, Nikon (old) and Hasselblad, seeing the > amazing photos that the photographers (and the brochures) with that gear > took. > > Harmful? No. Sometimes I like to know what settings I used. Especially in > the darkroom. Especially if I detect a fault. > > ...Vick > > > > On 3/24/2013 5:21 PM, Nathan Wajsman wrote: >> >> Someone, I think Cedric, commented on Jean-Michel's pictures today, asking >> for technical details. That got me thinking--back when I first took up >> photography in 1985, I religiously noted lens, exposure etc. in a >> notebook. >> I still have that notebook. The only thing is, the I have never actually >> used the information noted therein. Nowadays, I do not care about the >> technical details, indeed, when I post my weekly pictures, I don't even >> mention the equipment used. What's the point? Either the photo is good or >> it >> isn't. Whether I used my 4x5 or my iPhone should not influence the >> viewer's >> evaluation. >> >> Technical details are useless at best, and harmful at worst. >> >> Cheers, >> Nathan >> >> Nathan Wajsman > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information