Re: [Leica] Steady as she goes there, lad [y]

["Dan Post" <dpost@triad.rr.com>]

I don't know if it was the same study, but there was a psycological study
done- I remember reading about it when I studied the Psychology of
Perception, and it appeared that those batters that batted right handed, but
were left-eyed, did better than right handed batters that were right eyed-
even tough it was hard to gain much from their binocular vision, the fact
that the dominant eye was toward the pitcher seemed to be statistically
significant in terms of balls hit successfully. They can eact, but then
there is the kinesthetics involved- that is the ability to put your body or
body part where you want it without looking- either touching your nose in a
roadside sobriety test, or having you eye on the ball, and being able to put
your arms and bat where the ball will be in 2 milliseconds!!
Can this be applied to Right handed photographers who are left eyed?
Dan ( All this thinking makes my head hurt....) Post
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Cardish" <dcardish@microtec.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 9:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Steady as she goes there, lad [y]


> This reminds me of a study which proved that a major league baseball
player
> is simply unable to react fast enough to hit a pitched ball, considering
> how quickly it takes the ball to arrive at home plate.
>
> And yet, they do hit them.
>
> dan c.
>
> At 07:19 AM 08-10-00 -0400, gbicket wrote:
> >Good morning LUG,
> >
> >>From the start, I confess I am moderately indisposed to using
> >tripods--meaning that I do use them, but only when I don't think I can
get
> >the result I want without one, or using anything longer than the f4
280mm,
> >and quite often with that lens.
> >
> >Went to the Really Right Stuff site this morning, and found an
interesting
> >quote:
> >
> >"Handholding is strictly for dead photographers:  A human pulse beat will
> >cause 200 microns (.008 inch) displacement for 1/10th of a second.
Assuming
> >a shutter speed of 1/250th of a second, this movement alone will cause a
> >loss of 22% of resolution with a system capable of reproducing 100 lines
per
> >mm (lpm).  And at a shutter speed of 1/125th of a second, this
performance
> >would degrade to only 53 lpm--a 47% waste of of what you purchased."
John
> >B. Williams, Lens Clarity, page 191
> >
> >If Mr. Williams' science is accurate, it seems to me that many of us
Leica
> >Users are defeating or at least compromising the purpose of the acuity of
> >the lenses we buy by being highly disposed towards handholding OR, and
it's
> >an important distinction, we are starting with lenses of exceptional
> >sharpness,  to yield pleasing results net of the unsharpness slow speed
> >handholding creates.
> >
> >Thinking about all this makes me think of some of the beautiful hand held
> >results of so many of our LUG photographers, the velvety black and whites
> >from Tina Manley, the venerable Ted Grant, Filipo Caroti, and so many
more,
> >and it makes me wonder if some of the slow hand holding that many of the
LUG
> >talk about [sometimes endlessly] is directly akin to [oil] painting in a
> >very real way.  The deliberate ambiguity of the way those silver crystals
> >get laid down in a shot of a parent holding a child by candle light
creates
> >a sensation much like a brush stroke.
> >
> >The incongruity, but the clear nexus between obsessing about lens
sharpness
> >[often endlessly] and making photographs in situations with no hope of
> >capturing the sharpness of which the lens is capable, just struck me
> >interesting before coffee this morning.  Mastery of the obvious perhaps,
but
> >worth a grin before engaging in the day's tasks, nevertheless.
> >
> >Enjoy the light.
> >
> >Greg Bicket
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>