john_van_v
Well-known
The beauty that is in the song of a bird is also in the finger of the photographer. Probably what makes both the song bird's voice and the photographer's finger so artistically powerful is the empathic facility that allows us to interrelate with the surrounding environment-- to join in its rhythm.
Linked to the photographer's finger is the shutter, and through the shutter, the photographer extends his awareness, just as Jimi Hendrix was extended by his guitar. When a photographer reaches the mental state of taking a perfect picture, all the different levels of the human consciousness become linked, and the empathic understanding of the scene is linked through the empathic neurons (mirror and spindle) to the nervous system through to the camera, and vice versa-- the entire environment gets unified within the photographer's neurons.
The same is true for the musician. Live concerts are so much more exciting than recordings, with the Grateful Dead as a standing example; the audience feeds back emotions to the performers who then relate this emotional information with their motor neurons through their instruments, or voices, to the audience completing a cycle.
This ability to interrelate with the environment is what defines humanity; humans without these emotional communication facilities need to look-up these concepts Google or WikiPedia, as they have no ability to conceive of what these facilities are. As it turns out, most of the definitions of emotional facilities are written by people with no emotional facilities, probably because we who have normal emotional facilities take them for so much for granted that we cannot imagine why the over-obvious should be over-stated. As a example, emotional communication, especially happinenss, is often described as a "contagion" by scientists in an emotionally blind attempt to relate emotion to something they can actually grock: disease.
The question becomes "can the human motor system extend itself into an electronic device, or does the entry point to digital circuity become the terminus of the nervous system?"
Ask any neuroscientist or psychologist and their answer will be "no way in hell." In fact, the most popular psychological writer, Daniel Goleman (Emotional Intelligence), thinks we here are not having any significant emotional communication using email. I think that is correct about digital circuitry, especially as it relates to digitalized cameras as there is nothing for the human system to grasp upon in a circuit, except in an abstract sense. As to our communications here on the Internet, Goleman is wrong in my opinion.
He likes to say "you can't get a hug over the Internet," but you can get an emoticon hug, which is usually good to tide you over to the next physical hug.
I like my manually-fired rangefinder cameras because the mechanical action works well with my nervous system, and I am imagining that this is true for all photographers.
And the truth is, that in digital I am taking about 250 snaps to get 6 good images.
I cannot wait until I am able to dwell w/in arts of B&W developing and printing.
[URL="http://thinman.com/photography"]My recent digital work <-- CLICK
[/URL]
Linked to the photographer's finger is the shutter, and through the shutter, the photographer extends his awareness, just as Jimi Hendrix was extended by his guitar. When a photographer reaches the mental state of taking a perfect picture, all the different levels of the human consciousness become linked, and the empathic understanding of the scene is linked through the empathic neurons (mirror and spindle) to the nervous system through to the camera, and vice versa-- the entire environment gets unified within the photographer's neurons.
The same is true for the musician. Live concerts are so much more exciting than recordings, with the Grateful Dead as a standing example; the audience feeds back emotions to the performers who then relate this emotional information with their motor neurons through their instruments, or voices, to the audience completing a cycle.
This ability to interrelate with the environment is what defines humanity; humans without these emotional communication facilities need to look-up these concepts Google or WikiPedia, as they have no ability to conceive of what these facilities are. As it turns out, most of the definitions of emotional facilities are written by people with no emotional facilities, probably because we who have normal emotional facilities take them for so much for granted that we cannot imagine why the over-obvious should be over-stated. As a example, emotional communication, especially happinenss, is often described as a "contagion" by scientists in an emotionally blind attempt to relate emotion to something they can actually grock: disease.
The question becomes "can the human motor system extend itself into an electronic device, or does the entry point to digital circuity become the terminus of the nervous system?"
Ask any neuroscientist or psychologist and their answer will be "no way in hell." In fact, the most popular psychological writer, Daniel Goleman (Emotional Intelligence), thinks we here are not having any significant emotional communication using email. I think that is correct about digital circuitry, especially as it relates to digitalized cameras as there is nothing for the human system to grasp upon in a circuit, except in an abstract sense. As to our communications here on the Internet, Goleman is wrong in my opinion.
He likes to say "you can't get a hug over the Internet," but you can get an emoticon hug, which is usually good to tide you over to the next physical hug.
I like my manually-fired rangefinder cameras because the mechanical action works well with my nervous system, and I am imagining that this is true for all photographers.
And the truth is, that in digital I am taking about 250 snaps to get 6 good images.
I cannot wait until I am able to dwell w/in arts of B&W developing and printing.
[URL="http://thinman.com/photography"]My recent digital work <-- CLICK
[/URL]
Last edited:
FrankS
Registered User
John, there are some beautiful thoughts expressed beautifully here!
I disagree wtih the conclusion to this question: The question becomes "can the human motor system extend itself into an electronic device, or does the entry point to digital circuity become the terminus of the nervous system?" though, that a mechanical linkage makes this link possible while an electronic link does not.
The issue is responsiveness of the machine, be it mechanical or electronic, to the operator. In other words: shutter lag. We've all experienced the frustration of shutter lag on electronic auto-focus cameras, digital and film. Add to that the time it takes for the auto-flash capacitor to build its charge. That's where the problem lies.
Having said that, I prefer a mechanical shutter due to its independence from a battery, but that's just an irrational, personal bias.
Electronic shutter buttons have different "feels" to them and this feedback is also important to the user.
Lovely prose though. Thank you!
I disagree wtih the conclusion to this question: The question becomes "can the human motor system extend itself into an electronic device, or does the entry point to digital circuity become the terminus of the nervous system?" though, that a mechanical linkage makes this link possible while an electronic link does not.
The issue is responsiveness of the machine, be it mechanical or electronic, to the operator. In other words: shutter lag. We've all experienced the frustration of shutter lag on electronic auto-focus cameras, digital and film. Add to that the time it takes for the auto-flash capacitor to build its charge. That's where the problem lies.
Having said that, I prefer a mechanical shutter due to its independence from a battery, but that's just an irrational, personal bias.
Electronic shutter buttons have different "feels" to them and this feedback is also important to the user.
Lovely prose though. Thank you!
Last edited:
eric
[was]: emaquiling
Didn't Hendrix play an electric guitar? Maybe Andres Segovia might be a better example.
john_van_v
Well-known
Woa, are we going to pick this one to death or what ??
About Hendrix-- the strings he used were mechanical, and the electronics analog. He used vacuum tube amplifiers-- which many, if not most, guitarists prefer. By digital standards, the quaintness of old school rock and roll is nearly acoustic.
Another analogy of electronics in music would be the electronic piano. The early ones were total crap; it took a while for a good one to be developed. But still, no ancient classical or classical jazz muscian will use, or perhaps limit themselves to, an electronic piano. The action in the connections just cannot compare to the action in the mechanics of the piano. I seem to remember that the first mechanics actually worked in wood, on windmills and stuff.
Now moving on to Frank-- You are obviously deep-- but I hate to have to say this -- you are not fully in touch with your depth. I think you may already know this as you state that your preference for a mechanical shutter is "irrational." No it isn't. Maybe, Frank, you just wanted me to tell you this.
About Hendrix-- the strings he used were mechanical, and the electronics analog. He used vacuum tube amplifiers-- which many, if not most, guitarists prefer. By digital standards, the quaintness of old school rock and roll is nearly acoustic.
Another analogy of electronics in music would be the electronic piano. The early ones were total crap; it took a while for a good one to be developed. But still, no ancient classical or classical jazz muscian will use, or perhaps limit themselves to, an electronic piano. The action in the connections just cannot compare to the action in the mechanics of the piano. I seem to remember that the first mechanics actually worked in wood, on windmills and stuff.
Now moving on to Frank-- You are obviously deep-- but I hate to have to say this -- you are not fully in touch with your depth. I think you may already know this as you state that your preference for a mechanical shutter is "irrational." No it isn't. Maybe, Frank, you just wanted me to tell you this.
Last edited:
Tuolumne
Veteran
What a load of BS. LoL. No wonder the DSLR folks laugh at us.
/T
/T
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
Sparrow
Veteran
Tuolumne said:
You really need to get your chakras properly aligned
Tuolumne
Veteran
Sparrow said:You really need to get your chakras properly aligned
No doubt you are correct.
/T
ywenz
Veteran
Mechanical shutter is counter intuitive for digital sensors. As technology advances, we're going to see electronic shutter on all of our digital image capturing equipment. By then people on RFF will be asking camera makers to put in mechanism to make that "thwap" mechanical shutter click noise.
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
Why do some people mock this line of thinking? Are we not physical beings with a finely developed tactile sense? Our very sensitive fingers are able to detect very fine changes in hardness, smoothness, temperature and perhaps hundreds of other gradation. It makes perfect sense to me that some would prefer the mechanical vs the electronic because to them it simply feels better. That "irrational" feeling comes from somewhere. It doesn't come from advertising. It doesn't come from consumerism. It doesn't arise from anything other than our physical being. It makes sense that some people would rather write with a fine fountain pen versus a ball point (of any quality). Not everyone feels this way. And that's OK.
FrankS
Registered User
ywenz said:
They already do that on the P+S digitals.
Tuolumne
Veteran
Before anyone here dashes off any more poetic illusions about the human interface to mechanical vs. electronic devices, you might want to actually find something out about the matter. Researchers have been interfacing human neurons to semi-conductor chips for some time now. Try something like this before your next paen to mechanical shutters (which, btw, I prefer to electronic ones, but that's just because I like mechanical devices):
Bi-directional human machine interface via direct neural connection
Gasson, M. Hutt, B. Goodhew, I. Kyberd, P. Warwick, K.
Dept. of Cybern., Reading Univ., UK;
This paper appears in: Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2002. Proceedings. 11th IEEE International Workshop on
Publication Date: 2002
On page(s): 265- 270
ISSN:
ISBN: 0-7803-7545-9
INSPEC Accession Number: 7529324
Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/ROMAN.2002.1045633
Posted online: 2002-12-10 17:18:13.0
Abstract
This paper presents an application study into the use of a bi-directional link with the human nervous system by means of an implant, positioned through neurosurgery. Various applications are described including the interaction of neural signals with an articulated hand, a group of cooperative autonomous robots and to control the movement of a mobile platform. The microelectrode array implant itself is described in detail. Consideration is given to a wider range of possible robot mechanisms, which could interact with the human nervous system through the same technique.
Bi-directional human machine interface via direct neural connection
Gasson, M. Hutt, B. Goodhew, I. Kyberd, P. Warwick, K.
Dept. of Cybern., Reading Univ., UK;
This paper appears in: Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2002. Proceedings. 11th IEEE International Workshop on
Publication Date: 2002
On page(s): 265- 270
ISSN:
ISBN: 0-7803-7545-9
INSPEC Accession Number: 7529324
Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/ROMAN.2002.1045633
Posted online: 2002-12-10 17:18:13.0
This paper presents an application study into the use of a bi-directional link with the human nervous system by means of an implant, positioned through neurosurgery. Various applications are described including the interaction of neural signals with an articulated hand, a group of cooperative autonomous robots and to control the movement of a mobile platform. The microelectrode array implant itself is described in detail. Consideration is given to a wider range of possible robot mechanisms, which could interact with the human nervous system through the same technique.
Tuolumne
Veteran
FrankS said:
Yes, in particular, the new Ricoh GX100 does that, and as far as I can tell, it can't me disabled. :bang:
/T
Sparrow
Veteran
visiondr said:
Strangle electricity is one of the universe’s fundamentals it runs through you, me everything, mechanics, at its best, is just a clumsy attempt by us to mimic what mature achiever with a poetic ease, if we werre ever reach am affinity with the natural universe it will be an electrical connection! not a sentimental one!
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Hi John,
I disagree with you on just about everything here. Firstly I think an electronic shutter can be made to be indistinguishable from a mechanical one. Secondly I think you are not really comparing electronic vs. mechanical shutters, but better vs. less good ones. While you would probably agree that the M3's shutter is better than that of the Panasonic Lumix FX07, I doubt whether you would go as far to say that the mechanical shutter of the Bessa R is somehow better or more intuitive than the electronic shutter in the R4A.
Even if we don't go into the actual science, I think your ideal of the mechanical shutter as a quasimythical extension of the human nervous system collapses in the moment when you look at camera systems which offer both in direct comparison, like the Bessa R vs. RxA at the low end, or the Leica MP vs. M7 at the high end. Would you actually say that the M7's electronic shutter is somehow less adapted to the human nervous system than the MP's because the former has a different timing method? I have my doubts about that.
I disagree with you on just about everything here. Firstly I think an electronic shutter can be made to be indistinguishable from a mechanical one. Secondly I think you are not really comparing electronic vs. mechanical shutters, but better vs. less good ones. While you would probably agree that the M3's shutter is better than that of the Panasonic Lumix FX07, I doubt whether you would go as far to say that the mechanical shutter of the Bessa R is somehow better or more intuitive than the electronic shutter in the R4A.
Just to pick that out: Hendrix was using tube amplifiers mainly because they were then state of the art. The state of the art is a moving target. If you say that "by [today's] digital standards" their quaintness qualifies them as acoustic, then by extension you should also be saying the electronic shutter of the Yashica GSN should really count as mechanical, and that in ten years the electronic shutter of the Canon AE-1 should count as mechanical as well. So mechanical = old-fashioned = better. That's like talking about the steam locomotive as a quaint symbol of nostalgia and about human-centered technology, while in its time it was actually seen as a symbol of industrialisation, progress, high tech and even the dehumanisation of the world.john_van_v said:
Even if we don't go into the actual science, I think your ideal of the mechanical shutter as a quasimythical extension of the human nervous system collapses in the moment when you look at camera systems which offer both in direct comparison, like the Bessa R vs. RxA at the low end, or the Leica MP vs. M7 at the high end. Would you actually say that the M7's electronic shutter is somehow less adapted to the human nervous system than the MP's because the former has a different timing method? I have my doubts about that.
Last edited:
Michiel Fokkema
Michiel Fokkema
Tuolumne said:
Of course you can.
You only have to know were to hit it and how hard
BTW: I'm not really interested if a camera is mechanical or electronic. As long as it does what I want. Shutter lag however is very annoying and if mechanical is better in that regards I go for mechanical.
My M6 has hardly any shutter lag. The Hexar RF I have for a few weeks is accused for having a bit more. I'm not sure yet. If it has I will go back to the M6. If not I will be very happy with the top speed of 1/4000th and AE
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
nemjo
Avatar Challenge
Tuolumne said:
Read the manual. It's that easy.
But what I can't understand on the GX100, why the autofocus makes buzz even when it's set to snap focus...?
nemjo
kully
Happy Snapper
I've been in AI for over a decade and although he's a great spokesperson for AI and getting people excited about it, Warwick's human<>computer interface has some cool practical stuff but I don't "dig" the philosophy around it.
That was a very well written post John, but I don't think I understood whether it was an stabdalone article or something wanting discussion until Franks post. I don't think there is any difference between a mechanical or electronic shutter when it comes to human<>computer integration, the thing getting in the way is the extras bolted on (red-eye reduction, focus &c.). Of course there is a difference between a membrane switch and a M2 release, but then we come to something else
That was a very well written post John, but I don't think I understood whether it was an stabdalone article or something wanting discussion until Franks post. I don't think there is any difference between a mechanical or electronic shutter when it comes to human<>computer integration, the thing getting in the way is the extras bolted on (red-eye reduction, focus &c.). Of course there is a difference between a membrane switch and a M2 release, but then we come to something else
Last edited:
ywenz
Veteran
visiondr said:
FrankS said:
I'm taking about some sort of mechanical spring device that also gives you physical feedback. You don't need a true mechanical shutter, just a mechanical trigger that gives you the illusion of a mechanical shutter, where in fact it is just a trigger for an electronic shutter.
john_van_v
Well-known
I sometimes get mad at collectors for hoarding their cameras, but think about it --they are saving us from digital annihilation.ywenz said:
As soon as they move onto the next existence (if there is any), they leave for their relatives a sh*t-load of mechanical "junk" that winds up on ebay-- and for cheap.
My favorite right now is my Lynx 14. What a brick sh*t house it is. And no "thwap" to speak of; often ebay sellers state the camera is broken when it isn't.
I am not trashing digital photography at all. Besides being hypocritical to do so as all my recent work is digital, it has its own vailidity within its scope.
I feel the same about electronic music (as opposed to digital), it has been valid in it's own right since, for instacne, Ozzie started using it. Digital music is more about samples, which is a sort of stealing in that the "art" in the music is in the samples, and the digital muscian only creates a collage.
I had a friend on my empathy list (http://www.care2.com/c2c/group/empathy) who has a digital music effort called alicesyndrome. He had a lot of ideas I liked, but then we actually started discussing emapthy, I found him to be devoid of it --he has aspergers and hence alice, or aspergers, syndrome. When the discussion group began to show the importance of feelings in life, his aspergers "challenge" came out, and then he left the group-- not in a huff, but with an obvious "sock puppet" threatening message.
So I have to wonder if his digital art effort, which sounded good, is a valid art from. He certainly could not do the effort himself in analog in real life.
I think these are valid questions, and I think that old school black and white is where it is at, just like in the movie "Blow Up" with Vanessa Redgrave and David Hemmings.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.