the term analog

msbarnes

Well-known
Local time
2:07 PM
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
841
Location
NY, NY
Anyone find the term analog kind of weird? I believe that it is essentially synonymous with "film" in the usual context (e.g. analog cameras, analog photography, analog photographers, and etc.).

I don't like labels and generalizations but it seems that everyone but film photographers use this terminology (notice how I created a label and generalization haha).

I think that Apug should be changed to Fpug. No, just kidding. This thread isn't really a rant but just a pointless observation.
 
How about calling it chemical photography? But seriously, we were perfectly happy calling it just 'photography' for over 150 years, why the sudden change?
 
Generations X and Y saw CDs give way to downloads, and know about LPs, but don't own them. They have seen floppy disks, no longer floppy, give way to Zip disks and then writeable CDs and DVDs and now accept the passing of the inboard disk reader/writer in their laptops. Under such circumstances the relegation of the long hegemony of film to the designation so generic as analog is fitting but repellant.
 
I'm just talking about the use of the word film vs analog in this context, when specifying the medium makes sense. I found it weird that most film (or analog) enthusiasts do not use this term but many other people do. It is photography regardless but sometimes specification makes sense...like the numerous threads asking which lenses look best on film, which film cameras to get, which digital cameras to get, and etc..

you can say that painting is painting but oil painting is not acrylic painting.
 
I'm not arguing that the term is nonsensical. I just find it weird that Analog photographers/enthusiasts/whatever don't use this term....but it looks like many others don't find it weird...
 
Don't sensors are analog devices signal from which is converted to digital format? Just like CD's are.
 
Hi,

Trouble is they use analogue to mean everything that's not digital, not just film. And everything in this room is analogue. Mostly because it's an adjective.

Anyway, I say film and will stick with the word as everyone knows what I mean on this forum, with a couple of exceptions.

Regards, David
 
Analgoue. Thank you for reminding us of that spelling, just to erode the analog certainty. And can I also say 'fil'm' in deference to my Irish friends.
 
Don't sensors are analog devices signal from which is converted to digital format? Just like CD's are.

CDs positively are storing in a digital, binary format - about the only way to describe them as analogue would be that they use optoelectronic devices to read digital signals, the light and current flow in the electronics being analogue, but that is one tier below the signal.

Even where sensors are concerned, it depends on where you consider the analogue/digital conversion to be relevant - light being analogue, there has to be a conversion. And that must occur somewhere after the initial light-to-electricity conversion, as we don't have technologies that will do a direct conversion of light to digital (at least in a useful scale - there are things in optical and quantum computing that could be described as such, but these are very far from ready to build into a matrix chip).
 
A lot of people from the digital ages don't know what film is or are at least uncertain. So when talking about that medium, they feel more comfortable to use a generic term like "analog".

At least this is my weird theory for your observation ...
 
The Long and Short of it.

The Long and Short of it.

I found it weird that most film (or analog) enthusiasts do not use this term but many other people do.

For objects that are integral to the lives of a culture, people tend to use no adjectives for objects that they perceive as the standard and accepted by everyone, but use adjectives of what's not normal to them in relation to what is normal to them.

A good example of this is coffee. There are a few methods of making coffee. One popular method is to funnel hot water threw a steeper containing coarsely ground coffee beans. By this method, the coffee drips out of the bottom of the steeper into a pot. This coffee is sometimes referred to as drip coffee. Because the water is in the ground coffee beans for a relatively long time, it's known as a long coffee.

Another popular method of making coffee is to push hot water under pressure threw tightly packed, finely ground coffee beans. Coffee made by this method is sometimes called, espresso. Because the water is in the ground coffee beans for a relatively short time, it's also known as a short coffee. I believe the terms short coffee and long coffee are in relation to each other.

In the U.S., drip or long coffee has become the norm. So when you want such a coffee you would just ask for a coffee--no adjective is required. If you want a short coffee in the U.S., you will have to ask for an espresso. In Italy, since espresso or short coffee is the norm, you would just say that you want a coffee--no adjective is required. If there's some confusion as to whether you want it with milk, you might clarify by saying you want a normale--the normal way, the way of the norm.

It would be odd for Americans to ask for long coffee and Italians to ask for short coffee. To each of these cultures, just saying coffee is enough to get what they want. To them, what they perceive as the norm is what everyone drinks, except for those few odd people.

So, to people who has used film cameras all of their lives and for whom photography is an integral part of their lives, it's awkward and almost self-deprecating to add the adjective film or analog to photography terms. To the masses that have known only digital photography, it's odd to use film and they feel therefore it requires an adjective to clarify. To them, the word photography without an adjective implies digital photography. I don't think there will ever be a time when almost everyone will say both analog photography and digital photography, just like most Americans and Italians don't use adjectives for what they perceive as a normal coffee.
 
I once mentioned on a Canon specific forum that I used my Canon 200/2.8L only with film, it was assumed I meant I only used it for video......

It seems I hardly ever use the term analog (or analogue) photography, I understand analog is the wrong term, but still, I don't mind as it is clear to everyone what is meant by it.
 
Back
Top Bottom