[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: RE: [APML] Mission Statement Change?
I agree with Tony, and basically stated the same idea when this discussion
came up last time, before Tony was even participating on the list.
I think that the image processing techniques discussed are invaluable,
whether or not the image was captured with a CCD or with film.
I would hate to lose any of the current participants, whose discussions I
value greatly, and so I would prefer to see the list left as it is -
intact - with some liberalization (as it has currently been) as to CCD
discussions.
That said, I guess if two lists are the order of the day, then I'll watch
both of them. I don't think that will be more efficient, however, and it
will stifle some of the valuable interchange that occurs here right now.
Scott
website: http://www.rsiphotos.com/
email: ireland@gate.net
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-astro-photo@seds.org [mailto:owner-astro-photo@seds.org]On
> Behalf Of Ron Sedgley
> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 9:24 AM
> To: astro-photo@seds.org
> Subject: Re: RE: [APML] Mission Statement Change?
>
>
> When this question was first proposed I did not have a definitive opinion
> one way or the other.
> Being such a novice it was hard to intelligently make a choice. In the
> interim, there have been many
> excellent points brought forward and this discussion (thanks for
> no flames)
> was instructional in of itself.
> I would hate to loose any of the valuable input from the many contributors
> of this group...
> This discussion, if for no other reason, has served to illuminate the
> intended focus and to demonstrate
> that this group certainly can self manage itself.
>
> I vote to keep on our current track as stated below.
>
> No new lists (who needs another mail file?) If there comes an occasion
> where it seems that
> additional refocusing is required, I would think that this group can once
> again reevaluate
> the mission statement.
>
> Ron
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Emmanuele Sordini" <vega@ulisse.it>
> To: <astro-photo@seds.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 5:21 PM
> Subject: Re: RE: [APML] Mission Statement Change?
>
>
> > Perhaps I should *NOT* be writing this message, thereby contributing to
> > this never-ending debate... But sorry, I just couldn't help it.
> >
> > I think a very good point was made in the message below, and in many
> others
> > as well. The time has gone when bold AP'ers used only manual
> techniques...
> > then along came computers and now "manual" and digital-only photography
> > have a lot in common: the source is different, but most techniques are
> very
> > similar if not the same.... and the two "philosophies" can
> highly benefit
> > from each other.
> >
> > So here's my plea... Just leave it the way it is, with many
> AP'ers sharing
> > their precious experience, mainly about film of course, and no need for
> > another ML.... a tiny little venturing into the "dark side", if discreet
> > (Rob Gendler is a shining example) won't just harm anybody.
> > Just my 2 Euro-cents... :-))
> >
> > Emmanuele Sordini
> >
> > At 07.55 17/04/2002 -0700, you wrote:
> > >Hello Shekhar,
> > >
> > > Cute... but maybe everyone on the list should consider what Daphne
> > > came up with, which is:
> > >
> > > How many of you on the list still do all your
> astrophotography with
> > > only film, paper, and an enlarger? There may be some, but MOST of you
> are
> > > now DIGITIZING your work by scanning the originals into digital media.
> > >So in reality, you are really no different than anyone else
> out there who
> > >is working with digital information.
> > >
> > > Hypocrits! If you want to be "oh so pure" and not START with
> digital
> > > information via a CCD, I don't want to see any mention of Photoshop or
> > > Picture Window or Registar on this list!
> > >
> > > No.... it's not like that, is it? The reality of this situation is
> > > that most of you are clamoring to know more and more about digital
> > > processing, and that is a good thing. The only difference between a
> > > typical "film" person today and a CCD person is the origin of the
> data... BFD.
> > >
> > > I learned "CCD" in one lousy week... the reason I could do this is
> > > that I already was 80% there... in fact I prefer, and
> believe, that the
> > > digital techniques that I learned processing film are BETTER than any
> > > "canned" programs that you can buy for this purpose. Once you learn
> > > operation of the camera and the reduction process, it's all the same
> > > DIGITAL PROCESSING... sooooo.... unless you still only do
> your work with
> > > an enlarger, no computer... please, any protest over the origin of the
> > > DIGITAL DATA is pure hypocrisy, isn't it?
> > >
> > > Tony
> >
> >
> > -- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
> > Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
>
>
> -- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
> Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
-- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>