Re: carbon-digest V2 #8

I think a precise and elegant precedent for this situation has been used in
the music industry. Remember the AAA to DDD designation for CD's, where
A=analog, and D=digital. Why not simply use the same process as a more
exacting description of the whole process sequence? Thus, a print labeled
ADD would mean analog capture (film), digitally processed (scanned,
PhotoShop etc.), printed digitally. Personally, IMHO, this kind of problem
is a distraction from the much more difficult process of making meaningful
(hopefully) images. J Vee

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dat: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 10:59:09 -0700 (PDT)
> From: William Winkler <wildbillbugman@yahoo.com>
> Subject: [carbon] Alternative Name For Alternative Processes
>
> Hello to All,
> I do agree with Sandy about what he wrote in his last
> post on this matter. Here is my two cents worth. Why
> not "Analog Processes" or "Analog Printing"? This
> would incompus everything not Digital, including
> silver gelatin. If Alt Process is used with digitaly
> captured negs it would just be "Analog Printing".
> Cheerio,
> Bill
>
_______________________________________________
Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
carbon mailing list
carbon@spitbite.org
FAQ at http://spitbite.org/carbon/list.html
Received on Wed Sep 8 10:37:09 2004