Google| Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
| From | Savageduck |
| Date | 2013-12-05 18:39 (2013-12-05 09:39) |
| Message-ID | <2013120509390876599-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | nospam |
| Followups | nospam (7m) Eric Stevens (14h & 34m) > Savageduck |
On 2013-12-05 16:51:20 +0000, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>said:
nospamSomehow I think you guys have been using the wrong analogies for a photo NG. Forget about the racecar driver & architect, how about the owner of any digital camera, compact, or DSLR? Do they need to have a knowledge of how to operate a computer to shoot photographs with their digital camera?
In article <8lh0a9tu9ql767vl3u831ug3auer0etemq@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>wrote:nospamEric StevensEric Stevensnospam
All the top drivers have consideraable insight into the operation of the car and input into the way the car is set up. No two cars in the top teams handle the same way: they have been individually setup to the requirements of the individual drivers.
they have insight in how to race and what they need out of the car.
... and how to get it out of the car.
that's called being a race car driver.
it's not called being a mechanic.nospamthey don't need to know auto mechanics to do that, although they might want to.Eric Stevens
see the difference?
I think you are trying to make a difference where there isn't one. If you are of above average intelligence, competitive, and have been driving racing machinery for eight or more years, why should you not have a top of te line understanding of why the car does what it does?
nothing wrong with that but that's not a requirement to be a race car driver.nospamEric StevensnospamEric StevensEric Stevensnospam
The problem is that you have a narrow understanding. It's up to the architect to decide where he wants to. It's the programmer who has to take him. This only works if the architect has some understanding of what is possible.
he doesn't need to know what's possible and it's probably better if he doesn't.
Haw!
what's so funny?
The idea that a top line architect wouldn't/shouldn't have an understanding of what he can an cannot do with the tools at his disposal.
that's not what i said.
obviously they need to know how to *use* their tools.
what they don't need is how to *make* the tools, i.e., how to program a computer.
Does ownership of a digital camera also require them to purchase a computer and obtain, and learn to use digital image editing software so that can get physical examples of the photographs?
I believe that just as they did with their disposable film cameras they are able to take the camera down to the local Walmart, or Costco and have the counter jockey remove the memory card and print out the customer's print order, reinsert the card into the camera and format it for the customer. No computer owned, no OS of any type favored, no purchase of PS. Hell! I could just mail an SDHC card to MPix and have them print the entire contents of the card and be completely computer clueless.
Not every snap shooter using film knew their way around a darkroom, not every snapshot shooter in the digital age needs to own or know how to use a computer.
We are of the geekish mindset, and just can't imagine not having access to or the knowledge to process the images we capture. So it is hard to imagine folks coping without computers today.
I would bet that Barney Oldfield would still be able to muscle a car around a track today, just as Louis Chevrolet moved from the race track to manufacturing. I am sure that while Frank Lloyd Wright managed more than adequately with a drawing table, he would have very quickly adopted computers and design software to achieve his designs, just as I am certain that Adams would be using a digital darkroom today. He was a darkroom geek after all.
-- Regards,
Savageduck
2013-11-30-
-
