I hate this word...

Roger Hicks said:
Elizabeth, actually.With a zed (not a zee). Also, ever noticed that Britain is the only country that doesn't say which country it is on the stamps?

Our dear Queen's father was Geo. VI D. G. Omn. Brit. Reg. Fid. Def. Ind. Imp. (Georgius Sextus, Dei Gratia Omnia Britannia Rex, Filedli Defensor, India Imperator, By the Grace of God King of All Britain, Defender of the Faithful, Emperor of India). Read the coins!

Trick question: when did the last Ind. Imp. die?

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

At least that one was German ... the first one was Welsh for goodness sake, the Queen that is, not George
 
Thank God we have this thread to get all of that nonsense out of our existence.

Tomorrow, we can ask Stephen to put a big lock on it and we will dump it on the bottom of Loch Ness (are there any deeper lakes? they'll do fine as well!), and be done with the ridiculous whining and bickering for a whole year, maybe even more.

Gosh, do I look foward to that.
 
Michael Markey said:
In four hours this thread has reached five pages . On a camera forum ?
Click to expand...

In my defense it did start with a photographic related topic or at the very least an overly used term used mostly by digitized photographers to describe "Film" cameras...plus I had just read a thread where the OP used the word "Analog" instead of "Film"...:bang:
 
Walt G said:
If you look in your passport, it will say "British Citizen". A few years ago it would have said "British Subject".

"English" is NOT a nationality.
Click to expand...

Not being British or English, I should probably stay out of this, but...

I side with Roger on this. The passport issuing authority cannot be, by itself, an indicator of nationhood. It's certainly an attribute of sovereignty, but that's not the same as nationhood.

The Soviet Union issued passports for the better part of a century, although it was obviously a state with a considerable number of un-sovereign nations within its borders.

Here in the U.S., native American tribes are legally recognized as distinct nations, with limited sovereignty in specific areas. They can't issue passports, but they can certainly arrest you.

Wales, Scotland, Ireland and England certainly considered themselves distinct nations throughout most of history.
 
Last edited:
wgerrard said:
Not being British or English, I should probably stay out of this, but...

I side with Roger on this. The passport issuing authority cannot be, by itself, an indicator of nationhood. It's certainly an attribute of sovereignty, but that's not the same as nationhood.
Click to expand...

I can understand your reasoning but it doesn't work like that.

Ex: When Roger applied for his French residents permit he would have been asked to show his certificate of nationality. No certificate of English nationality exists, so he would have shown the next best thing, his passport, which states "British Citizen".

A British citizen without a passport has no proof of citizenship. The British are not obliged to carry ID cards, (yet).
 
Last edited:
What does any of this have to do with "photography general interest"

Maybe it could be moved to the "and now for something completely different forum".

That would be a good place for it.
 
I'm not really bothered that much by terms like bokeh, glass, soup and stuff. Some I find stupid, some I use myself, but I don't really care that much.
One thing that has come to upset me is that if people talk to me about cameras, they refer to their own cameras as "just a digital camera". As if they would expect my to be some sort of film snob or something. That really makes me wonder if I'm sending the wrong messages.
 
I thought analogue was non-digital electronics whereas film is chemistry, n'est pas?

In any case what's the good if you talk in flowers and they think in pastry? Personally I prefer eclairs.
 
Walt G said:
When Roger applied for his French residents permit he would have been asked to show his certificate of nationality. No certificate of English nationality exists, so he would have shown the next best thing, his passport, which states "British Citizen".

A British citizen without a passport has no proof of citizenship.
Click to expand...

Then, you would define "nation" as any group of people who happen to be resident within the borders of the same sovereign regime?

The national identity of the Scots or the Welsh certainly did not go away when they were subsumed by the English crown, nor did the notion of Irish nationhood fade away when that country was colonized.

Ukrainian, Belorussian, etc., national identities did not vanish while the government in Moscow issued their passports. Did anyone ever consider themselves as a member of a "Soviet" nationality?

Issuing a passport is an indicator of sovereign power. National identity is something else again.
 
Walt G said:
I can understand your reasoning but it doesn't work like that.

Ex: When Roger applied for his French residents permit he would have been asked to show his certificate of nationality. No certificate of English nationality exists, so he would have shown the next best thing, his passport, which states "British Citizen".

A British citizen without a passport has no proof of citizenship. The British are not obliged to carry ID cards, (yet).
Click to expand...
England IS a nation in the literal sense - the word derives from the latin "natio", meaning to be born. Since England is a political and geographical area in it own right, all who are born there are of English nationality - at least in a technical sense.

Nationality is a somewhat distorted word so I am, of course, a British citizen not an English one but I'm English first and British second. This is not because of a dislike of the Scots, Welsh or Irish (or anyone else "foreign" for that matter), it's simply a case of where I was born.
 
Something I read on the IlfordPhoto site:

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/pressroom/article.asp?n=122

"BOB DYLAN MAKES ANOTHER COMEBACK WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM ILFORD PHOTO
A film roll containing photographs of Bob Dylan has been unearthed and developed for the first time 31 years after it was exposed, thanks to UK based ILFORD PHOTO.

“Try that with a hard drive,” Says photographer."

Love it!
 
My Double Sided CP/M 5.25" Floppies are still readable.

They even boot up on the Xerox 820-II.

An Elephant Never Forgets...

Oh. I used to develop Image Processing software on it to process Landsat 4 data. Processing images with 64KBytes of RAM meant tight code.
http://www.nasm.si.edu/exhibitions/lae/SCRIPT/ov_land_landsat.htm

"Thematic Mapper". That is a cool word. Well, technically two words. Especially in the 1970s.

Once the FORTRAN-IV code was written, ported it over to an FPS-120b on a VAX 11/780 with an RP07 Disk.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FPS_AP-120B

http://computer-refuge.org/bitsavers/pdf/dec/disc/rp07/ER-ORP07-SV_RP07_ServiceMan_Oct80.pdf

It was fairly big, but held 512MBytes.

All in all, the VAX with FPS-120b and RP07, with a Deanza IP8500 Image Processor cost about $500K.

It's the one that I made catch on fire when the power supplies overloaded processing image data.
 
Last edited:
There are several reasons why a thread like this proliferates, but perhaps the most important is that many people on RFF are both intelligent and passionate about communication -- and 'communication' can be both intellectual and emotional. Those with different intellectual or emotional viewpoints therefore argue. This in turn upsets that small minority which is anti-intellectual or anti-emotional (oftentimes because they refuse to admit that they are, in fact, either intellectual or emotional or both, or they wouldn't join in...)

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom