Film is film,

[kbg32]

not films. Film - singular and plural.

Just a simple quirk that irks me slightly. I know that English is not everyone's first language.

Cheers!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Keith,

Eh?

I buy (or process) two films, not two film.

But then, English isn't your first language either. It's American. The two are similar but far from identical.

Cheers,

R.

 

[coelacanth]

Can you give us some citations? Several dictionaries that I've checked have films as the plural form of of film. Also "film" can be used for a strip of film, film as "movie," or casually short for rolls of film. I think, at least today, "films" is a forgivable usage.

I'm a Japanese in California so what do I know!? 😛

 

[martin s]

Semi-Off-Topic: I recently got the impression there's a difference between exact, precise and accurate - is that true? In German we say "genau", works for us.

martin

 

[coelacanth]

Semi-Off-Topic: I recently got the impression there's a difference between exact, precise and accurate - is that true? In German we say "genau", works for us.

martin

Off-off-topic. At least in Japanese, we have different words for exact, precise and accurate.

 

[jonmanjiro]

and gear is gear!!!!

not gears :bang:

gear, like equipment, is an uncountable noun 😉

 

[martin s]

Off-off-topic. At least in Japanese, we have different words for exact, precise and accurate.

That implies you know the difference? When would you use which?

martin

 

[jonmanjiro]

Dear Keith,

Eh?

I buy (or process) two films, not two film.

But then, English isn't your first language either. It's American. The two are similar but far from identical.

Cheers,

R.

nope. you buy or process two rolls of film.

 

[dubes]

Sorry, but even in American English the plural of 'film' is 'films', as in how many films did you see last year?

 

[Roger Hicks]

and gear is gear!!!!

not gears :bang:

gear, like equipment, is an uncountable noun 😉

No it's not. Gearboxes may have three, four, five or more gears. And 'equipments' may refer to a range of different things: check the OED.

Cheers,

R.

 

[-doomed-]

I process two rolls of film. Not films. The word rolls implies the plural aspect as well as the two.

I dont go to see a film , I got to the movies.
There are gears in a gearbox , I call it a trans or tranny (slang for transmission, not slides or transparencies)
Roger ,
I believe you are right about americans speaking a vastly different form of english, a dialect if you will .

Language is a subject that will always have people at odds , much like religion or politics.

 

[Roger Hicks]

nope. you buy or process two rolls of film.

What? 8x10 inch rolls? Not unless I've REALLY screwed up.

Cheers,

R.

 

[jonmanjiro]

No it's not. Gearboxes may have three, four, five or more gears. And 'equipments' may refer to a range of different things: check the OED.

Cheers,

R.

i don't think anyone is talking about gearboxes on this forum 🙄

and i don't have the OED handy so maybe you could provide us with a sample sentence using "equipments" 😛

 

[Roger Hicks]

i don't think anyone is talking about gearboxes on this forum 🙄

and i don't have the OED handy so maybe you could provide us with a sample sentence using "equipments" 😛

First: it's still a countable noun. Do not confuse one usage with a general rule.

Second: OED Second ed. Vol V p. 355 'Used in the pl. to indicate the articles severally, in the sing. collectively.'

Smeaton, 1793, 'To forward our equipments for rendering the house habitable'

Strutt, 1801, Sports and Pastimes, 'The hunting equipments of the female archers'

Act 36&37 Vict. (Act of Parliament) 1873, 'Equipments which are prima facie evidence of a Vessel being engaged in the Slave Trade'

Cheers,

R.

 

[rpsawin]

Thanks guys...the comic relief is appreciated.

Bob

 

[Roger Hicks]

This is Rangfinderforum not dictionary.com. Let's stick to photography.

But a lot of people enjoy such discussion(s), and photographic equipment is, or photographic equipments are, a popular topic.

Cheers,

R.

 

[coelacanth]

That implies you know the difference? When would you use which?

martin

Yes. Pretty much like German as Roland said. Sometimes they are interchangeable, other times they are not. And each english counterpart can be said differently based on the context.

 

[Spleenrippa]

What? 8x10 inch rolls? Not unless I've REALLY screwed up.

Cheers,

R.

In that case, wouldn't you have processed two sheets of film?

 

[jonmanjiro]

First: it's still a countable noun. Do not confuse one usage with a general rule.

Second: OED Second ed. Vol V p. 355 'Used in the pl. to indicate the articles severally, in the sing. collectively.'

Smeaton, 1793, 'To forward our equipments for rendering the house habitable'

Strutt, 1801, Sports and Pastimes, 'The hunting equipments of the female archers'

Act 36&37 Vict. (Act of Parliament) 1873, 'Equipments which are prima facie evidence of a Vessel being engaged in the Slave Trade'

Cheers,

R.

haha yes, i should have been more specific 🙂

but gear, when used to mean one's photographic related equipment or stuff i.e the way its generally used on this forum, is never gears.

thanks for the "equipments" examples. i think the dates say it all 😉

 

[Robert Lai]

Precise and accurate are two different items. A precise machine will repeatably perform the same task in nearly the same manner, with minimal standard deviation. A very precise rifle may group the shots within a 2x2 inch square at 100 yards, for example. However, this does not necessarily mean that it is accurate, as those well grouped shots may have missed the target of interest. An accurate device will hit the actual target, but need not be precise (i.e., it could spread shots all over the place [i.e. imprecise], but one of those shots may hit the bulls-eye [accurate]).

Exact refers to how small a tolerance you wish to have. Do you wish to know to 1 inch, or 1/1000 of an inch? If I were building a wooden fence, cutting wood to a tolerance within 1/2 an inch may be quite precise (if sometimes inaccurate). However, if I were cutting gears for a Leica, even 1/1000" tolerance would not be exact, precise, or accurate enough.