Holy shit! Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chaso DeChaso" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:16 PM Subject: Re: law and image > I've attemped to establish film as a medium having a > faithful connection to reality, the negative being not > unlike for example a person's shadow, which has a > sensical connection to the real, in contrast to > digital imaging, wherein there is a separation from > reality which occurs when the vestiges of the real are > transformed into anonymous data. The argument keeps > cropping up that since a photo can be altered it is > fiction anyway and nothing more to do with the real > than digital is. I am here arguing that if you use > the methodology that something can be altered and > therefore is nothing more than fiction than to be > consistent one must apply this method to seeing > itself: since optical illusions are possible and > distortions are always present in seeing, then seeing > must be regarded as a fiction (which is in a sense > technically true, but indeed only technically so, > since no one lives life disbelieving whatever he sees > as a matter of course.) Rules of evidence, if they > are to equate film and digital by this methodology > must therefore also equate seeing as pure fiction. > Since no one would argue this is so (no one would > disregard all sightings of a crime as possible > hallucination), I have undermined the methodology of > simply saying that film is as fictional as digital > because it can be altered. > > Chaso > > --- Dr E D F Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Chaos, > > > > What on earth are you talking about? > > > > Don > > > > Dr E D F Williams > > > > http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams > > Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery > > Updated: March 30, 2002 > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Chaso DeChaso" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 5:29 PM > > Subject: Re: law and image > > > > > > > Right, they are all fiction. It's as simple as > > that. > > > Also there are optical illusions, distortions, > > > uncertainties etc. in seeing so seeing is fiction > > so I > > > wonder why having seen something occur is > > evidence? > > > > > > > > > > > Of course they're all fiction, but it is my > > > > > > > > > ===== > > > Chaso DeChaso > > > > > > > > > "Less is more cheap" - Osvaldo Valdes, Architect > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site > > > http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > ===== > Chaso DeChaso > > > "Less is more cheap" - Osvaldo Valdes, Architect > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site > http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ > >
