Re: [Leica] Format units question

["Henning J. Wulff" <henningw@archiphoto.com>]

Glen Robinson wrote:

>I have always wondered when the rest of the world will abandon the obsolete
>metric system and move to the modern English system.
>
>Seriously now.  The English system has its faults, but it is based on human
>experiences so it is easy to relate to.  For example, the Fahenheit system
>is basically a 0 to 100 scale.  In most places, 0 degrees F is about as
>cold  and 100 degrees F is about as hot as it gets.  What does the boiling
>point of water (100 degrees C) have do with daily weather?  More examples.
>A foot is approximately the length of the foot of a man and a yard is his
>pace.  A cubic is the distance from an elbow to finger tips.  Handheld
>calculators have removed much of the reason for using the metric system.

I sure hope this was written tongue in cheek (or some other pleasant place...).

Besides being a photographer I am also a practicing architect, and I have
to deal with both systems on a daily basis. Some projects are metric, some
Imperial. The Imperial system is always more cumbersome to deal with.
Adding strings of dimensions that start with feet and end in eighths of
inches is stoopid. As far temperatures go, the whole thing is completely
arbitrary either way. The digits 3 and 2 make no more sense as a basis for
temperature measurement than any other digits, and what does 212 have to do
with daily weather? This is a non-argument.

HOWEVER, lets talk about volumes. How many cc's are in a US fluid oz., in
an Imperial fluid oz., in a US quart, pint, gallon vs. in an Imperial unit
of the same name? What a mess! Calculating dilutions using US or Imperial
measurements (or even better; a combination) demonstrates directly why we
should use metric measurements. Maybe we should also deal in drams (US -
1dram=3.697cc, Imp. - 1dram=3.552cc) or firkens the size of one US unit
being about 34 liters.
Or if one dealt in old Roman formulary, you would mix up about one hemina
to develop a 36 exp. roll. All of these units had a reasonable basis at one
time, but nothing systematic. The metric system is the only one that is
truly systematic, and that makes all the difference.

Actually, for Japanese made cameras we should probably talk about the
115rin format Nikons and Canons, and the big Pentax 18x23 (in bu units, of
course), as they have developed a fairly consistent unit system themselves.

As far as mentioning the larger dimension first, I believe the British have
the lock on that idiosyncracy.

Non-Imperiously,


   *            Henning J. Wulff
  /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
 /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
 |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com