Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Turing test
From: "bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 15:26:14 -0400

And a photo CAN do that. What it can't do - unless it is a
three-dimensional macro, 1:1 photo ;-) - is visually REPRODUCE
something.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Daniel
Ridings
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 3:16 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] Turing test


Oh boy, now we are getting philosophical :)

In order to represent something, you have to reproduce its essence.
(TGIF)

Daniel


On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, bdcolen wrote:

> A photo can be  a faithful REPRESENTATION of something without being a

> faithful REPRODUCTION of something. ;-)
>
> B. D.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of 
> LRZeitlin@aol.com
> Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 2:31 PM
> To: leica-users-digest@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Leica] Turing test
>
>
> Eric writes:
>
> <<What's all this nonsense and turing tests that mean nothing? Any 
> idiot
>
>
> can tell the difference between a photo of a window and the window.
>
>
> And I know cats that DO react to the TV.>>
>
> Eric,
>
> That's just the point. If the photo were truly a faithful 
> representation of reality, you should not be able to tell the 
> difference. "Truth" has nothing to
> do with photographic fidelity.
>
> Your cats are smarter than mine.
>
> Larry Z
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see 
> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see 
> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html