Photography and the Law - Useful UK Article

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by David Littlewood, Aug 28, 2005.

  1. When they get some, Amazon UK will sell it to you for £20.19 -
    http://tinyurl.com/bw9mg .
     
    Roger Whitehead, Aug 31, 2005
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. David Littlewood

    Andrew Cook Guest

    Only in the awful Judge Dredd movie.

    The use of "double whammy" in UK politics predates the movie.
     
    Andrew Cook, Aug 31, 2005
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. David Littlewood

    David Harmon Guest

    Al Capp
    Yes.
     
    David Harmon, Aug 31, 2005
    #23
  4. David Littlewood

    Liz Guest

    In message <df4d7j$2e7$-infra.bt.com>

    ['Creative Vision,]
    .... and for those of us with less than 20/20 vision, creative or
    otherwise???

    Slainte

    Liz
     
    Liz, Aug 31, 2005
    #24
  5. Are you sure it wasn't his brother Andy? :cool:
     
    Roger Whitehead, Aug 31, 2005
    #25
  6. Yes, that's a valid criticism. It's set on a decent body depth so
    there's no crowding, but the captions must be in 6 point - amazingly small.

    David
     
    David Kilpatrick, Aug 31, 2005
    #26
  7. David Littlewood

    Tony Polson Guest


    Thanks for the recommendation. I might just give it a try, as the
    photo book budget remains unspent so far this year.

    ;-)
     
    Tony Polson, Sep 1, 2005
    #27
  8. David Littlewood

    Frank ess Guest

    Frank ess, Sep 1, 2005
    #28
  9. David Littlewood

    kashe Guest

    Too late by at least twenty years.
     
    kashe, Sep 1, 2005
    #29
  10. Which is, of course, why I like it....

    I'm sure you are right, and that producing magazines for a minority of
    literate and technically savvy readers must be a hard act to achieve
    (and stay solvent). Unfortunately, IMO, a web-based subscription service
    would be a poor substitute. It may be a generation thing, but I still
    find printed material far more satisfactory than a computer screen. I
    must try the website though, to get into practice.

    David
     
    David Littlewood, Sep 1, 2005
    #30
  11. David Littlewood

    Paul Ryan Guest

    Here's a link to what I think was the original article: I recently got that link from uk.rec.subterranea - Will be very useful.

    --
    Paul

    - Mansfield Goths and Alternatives:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mansfieldgoths
    - Mansfield Chavs: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mansfieldchavs
    - The Alternative Guide to Mansfield:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alternativemansfield

    - Get a taste of my life at: http://www.livejournal.com/users/ppotter
     
    Paul Ryan, Sep 1, 2005
    #31
  12. David Littlewood

    Sander Vesik Guest

    PDF is quite easily capable of multiple resolution support (at the cost
    of a larger download for everybody) which woul dlet you print it out
    with little if any losses?
     
    Sander Vesik, Sep 1, 2005
    #32
  13. David Littlewood

    Tony Polson Guest


    Ooh! Spot the snobbery ... so sharp that it hurts! Ouch!

    The truth is that there are a great many literate and technically
    savvy readers who simply don't have the time to wade through pages of
    turgid prose that is aimed at people of a certain generation with time
    on their hands. They want to read something that basically cuts to
    the quick, but also has options for more detailed reading.

    The Dorling Kindersley style achieves that. Of course it needs
    writers who are more articulate, and who possess the (rare) ability to
    explain complex ideas in simple terms. I have no doubt that these
    gifted writers would find it much easier to write an old-fashioned
    long-winded narrative with every possible detail (whether needed or
    not) buried deep in pages and pages of traditionally crafted prose.

    There is indeed a generation to whom the long-winded prose appeals,
    but it isn't the generation that is buying new equipment and is keen
    to learn. It is the generation that will soon be dead, and that
    explains why the market for this style of publication is inexorably
    diminishing towards zero.
     
    Tony Polson, Sep 2, 2005
    #33
  14. Ooh! Spot the snobbery ... so sharp that it hurts! Ouch!
    And spot the /reductio ad absurdum/ and the use of derogatory adjectives.

    Just because writing isn't highly compressed does not necessarily make it
    turgid or long-winded. Some readers, whatever their literacy level,
    technical standard or age, simply prefer writing that doesn't rush through
    a topic.

    The American magazine, _Popular Photography and Imaging_, for instance,
    runs plenty of lengthy articles and it is one of the most widely-read
    photography periodicals in the world.
     
    Roger Whitehead, Sep 2, 2005
    #34
  15. I find it amusing that you accuse me of snobbery, but apparently agree
    with every word in my statement...
    Whatever floats your boat, Tony. Some people want to have their
    information pre-digested, never question what is given to them, and
    accept the received opinions. Others - and there are some in every
    generation, fortunately - wish to acquire a thorough understanding of
    what is going on, demand logical explanations, and are prepared to
    challenge received opinion if it does not convince them. Neither is
    necessarily better than the other - the hard-working skip-reader may be
    very clever, and the curmudgeonly challenger may be as thick as pigshit
    - they are just different (though, let it be said, the advances in human
    knowledge rarely come from the first type). Long may it continue, say I.
    I think you are guilty of prejudice (literally) in your description. "DK
    is splendid stuff, the other is long-winded narrative." I remember the
    same technique being used by student claques to rubbish their enemies,
    and didn't fall for it then. Obviously a well written, clear explanation
    beats long winded, incomprehensible, turgid prose. This is hardly the
    issue: that is, whether a deep explanation is more desirable than a
    superficial one. I am familiar with the DK style, and very good it is
    for children. It lacks detail for the full story though; "options for
    detailed reading" seem all too often, on examination, to be
    frustratingly lightweight.
    You may be right. Regrettably, if you are, then the future generations
    are doomed to carry on making the same mistakes as the past, probably in
    greater numbers. Thankfully, digital technology means they will not use
    so many resources!

    However, I believe there will always be enough enthusiasts who do value
    the deeper understanding to support at least some of the more rigorous
    material. I do agree that most magazines comprehensively fail to achieve
    this. It would be interesting to compare notes on which magazines work
    best, in what style.

    David
     
    David Littlewood, Sep 2, 2005
    #35
  16. David Littlewood

    Tony Polson Guest


    Pop Photo is the most dumbed down photo magazine I have ever read. It
    is aimed firmly at idiots who need to be spoonfed with the most
    patronising, slow prose because they haven't the intelligence to
    understand a punchy, well-written article. It is probably the worst
    example you could quote in support of your point.

    An annual subscription (by mail) costs $10 in the USA.

    That's about £5.50 for twelve issues. Draw your own conclusions.
     
    Tony Polson, Sep 2, 2005
    #36
  17. (or trolling) snipped]

    You seem incapable of debating matters reasonably or unemotionally.
    Goodbye.
     
    Roger Whitehead, Sep 2, 2005
    #37
  18. David Littlewood

    Tony Polson Guest


    You seem to fit the stereotype of the ntlworld domain.

    ;-)
     
    Tony Polson, Sep 2, 2005
    #38
  19. David Littlewood

    Tony Polson Guest


    And you are guilty of presumption. You quoted something I never
    implied, let alone wrote, then criticised me for it.

    If that isn't the height of arrogance, then I don't know what is.

    But the line you take here is all about arrogance, a barely disguised
    attempt at intellectual snobbery. You confuse presentation with
    content, and imply that anything that is easily readable cannot
    possibly be worth reading. Your condescending attitude towards an
    internationally renowned and highly successful educational publisher,
    whose books are models of clarity, sell to all generations and have
    received countless literary awards, tells us all we need to know.

    You are a snob, and you use every available opportunity to show it.
     
    Tony Polson, Sep 2, 2005
    #39
  20. David Littlewood

    Confused Guest

    On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 01:25:44 +0100
    In message <>

    I realize this twerp is trolling...however...
    I hate it when someone reminds me I'll be dead soon. Makes me wonder
    why I'm spending several thousand dollars a year on new cameras,
    lenses, accessories...not to mention computers and networking and the
    pioneering thereof...

    Jeff
     
    Confused, Sep 2, 2005
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.