Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/12/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Leica DMR DNGs are 16 bit. I imagine the M8's are as well. Eric On 12/8/06, Bob Shaw <rsphotoimages@comcast.net> wrote: > > Tony: > > Hear, hear!! > > Sorry for your loss, and glad you had such a great friend. Men (and > women) such as John still walk the earth, and we are richer for it. > > And, I would caution, we would be well served to pay attention when > they are in the room. > > As (one of a million +) former photojournalists, my compliments on the > piece. Genuine. from the heart. > > > Best Regards, > > Bob in Seattle. > > > > > > On Dec 8, 2006, at 7:50, Lottermoser George wrote: > > The Last of a Dying Breed > > By Tony Long| Also by this reporter > 02:00 AM Dec, 07, 2006 > > The Luddite > > An old friend of mine died recently. Well, I mean he wasn't an "old > friend." He was in his late 70s (which I think still qualifies as > "old") and he was a friend, even though I was privileged to know him > for only five or six years. Still, his passing leaves a pretty big gap > in my life, and I think I know why. > > John was a dabbler, a sort of Renaissance man, if you will. And you > just don't see a whole lot those around anymore, not in this age of > narrowly defined interests. He was a courtly man, a retired cab driver > who thought of himself as an artist. He was an accomplished painter. He > could sculpt. He wrote poetry, which wasn't very good, and prose, which > was top notch. He played some classical guitar and fooled around with > the piano. He was a lifelong scuba diver who hunted abalone up the > coast and had once been a competitive swimmer. He traveled the world > several times over. He spoke a couple of languages. He was married > three or four times. (He never got the hang of domesticity apparently, > but he always spoke fondly of his exes.) > > He was one of those larger-than-life guys who always made you smile > when he hove into view. > > But he never learned how to use a computer. What's more, he never had > any interest in learning. For John, life existed "out there," not on a > screen. He never owned a cell phone, or any phone, for that matter. > Didn't have a TV. Probably never heard of an iPod. But he was one of > the most interesting people I've ever known. > > I think what made John so interesting, beyond the adventures he had and > the great stories he loved to tell, was that there was always momentum > to his life. He could make a lot out of a little. His days were full > and I'll wager that, after Viagra came along, his nights were pretty > busy, too. He personified the active over the passive. He was a doer, > not a watcher. > > Which is probably the biggest reason John didn't care about computers. > Yes, they're efficient and good for business, if business is what you > care about. But sitting at a computer when you don't have to is to be > cripplingly passive, even if you're playing the bloodiest, most > maniacal shooter game ever. Sorry, podnah, but that doesn't make you > Billy the Kid. You're just a couch potato with twitchy fingers. > > Computers have changed the nature of the workplace, the nature of work > itself. This is the information age so a lot of us are cubicle-bound > and tethered to the screen, whether we like it or not. It's also the > age of specialization. You gotta work to live so unless you've > cultivated a rare skill -- like you can really hit a curveball or > something -- there's a good chance you'll wind up behind a desk. And on > that desk, inevitably, will be a computer. > > Which makes it really important for your balance and well-being to get > out into the world in your free time and do something -- anything -- > that doesn't involve some kind of software. > > The physical toll of computer overuse is well documented. And while I'm > unaware of any statistical data supporting my thesis that sitting in > front of a computer for more than a few hours a day is spiritually > draining, anecdotal evidence abounds. You just have to look around you, > at a society growing more dysfunctional, discourteous and disconnected > every day. There are a lot of reasons for this, of course, but > technology that discourages real human contact is certainly a prime > contributor. > > We are social animals. We are meant to see each other, speak with each > other, touch each other, smell each other. "Connecting" online with > people you never actually see face-to-face doesn't count. If that's > what passes for "community" in the 21st century, well, poor us. > > Should we be more like John? Sure, if you can swing it. If you're > resourceful enough and not materialistic you might have a shot, but the > world has changed since John was young. It's hard to poke around in the > interesting corners of life when you're under the gun to make as much > money as possible just to stay afloat. > > Pity. We'd be so much better off. > Tony Long is copy chief at Wired News. > > Regards, > George Lottermoser > george@imagist.com > > > > On Dec 8, 2006, at 9:45 AM, Walt Johnson wrote: > > > If any of us really valued our time we'd put a couple of rounds in > > these forking computers and go fishing. :-) > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >