I hate this word...

There are 2 major definitions of "analog": one in electronics and one in literature & science. Unfortunately, the term fails both when applied to film cameras.

There isn't any difference between the electronic and scientific version. Both denote something that changes continuous in time. (the literature interpretation as being "vaguely equivalent" is out of this context)

The problem is how it interpreted by those that have no electronics or scientific background.
 
Now just a minute, doesn't film capture the electromagnetic waves that hit it? Isn't it therefore an electronic medium just like digital. Analogue is a superfluous label.
 
I think the whole point of language is to convey ideas, and almost everyone understands what is meant by the terms analogue or digital photography, the introduction of boolean is as much of a conceit as bokeh was in the last decade ... people use such words as a pretence
 
Both denote something that changes continuous in time. (the literature interpretation as being "vaguely equivalent" is out of this context)

Back when I learned electronics, the word analogue was used to denote a computing device that predicted a result by creating a copy, hence "analogue", of a real world interaction. The Wikipedia article seems to echo that definition.

Language, of course, is a constantly moving target. The change in meaning began, I imagine, when people started to produce interfaces between digital (i.e. boolean) circuits and continuously variable circuits, such as continuous frequency amplifiers. It's not a big leap from there to regarding the world as analogue, in other words continuously variable, or digital.
 
There isn't any difference between the electronic and scientific version. Both denote something that changes continuous in time. (the literature interpretation as being "vaguely equivalent" is out of this context)

Not quite, they refer to a model of a process, rather than a process itself. In electronics in particular, it's a subject of signal processing with analogue being continuous models and digital discrete.

The signal processing devices thus can be analog or digital. E.g. your turntable is analogue, and CD player is digital. With imaging technology, your granma's Betamax recorder is analogue, while a DSLR is, well, digital.

The term makes no sense when applied to a technology not involving signal processing, e.g. film cameras, ovens, combustion engines and so on. That said I think it's hopeless fighting its misuse.
 
Not all new, and don't get me upset, but funny (at least to me)...

"Glass"
"Soup"
"Wet" prints

oh, and "Giclee (or however you spell it) and "Fine Art Photography"

Cheers,
Gary

I have used "Soup", and "Wet Prints" for over 30 years!!

I hate to hear the words: Shot, and Shoot, referring taking a "Photograph:.

Guns Shoot, not cameras..

@Apreture64... My avatar must bug you also..:rolleyes:
 
In this context, it's not even as though analogue was spelt correctly either . . .
;)

That's an interesting one. In the UK, one would say "analogue" for all applications of the word. In the US, "analog". Myself, I'm Canadian, and therefore torn between the two cultures, so I think most literate Canadians would refer to an "analog computer", but also say that something could be a good "analogue" of something else.

Cheers, eh?
Dez
 
Back when I learned electronics, the word analogue was used to denote a computing device that predicted a result by creating a copy, hence "analogue", of a real world interaction.

So by my Canadian definition, an analog computer would create an analogue of the system it is modelling. Lots of strange word usages in Canada: it is probably the only place where "chips" refers to two different foods, called "fries" or "crisps" in other places. Context is required to understand which one is being requested.

Cheers,
Dez
 
Back
Top Bottom