Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 79

Thread: "Does not effect image"

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    954

    "Does not effect image"

    I think we should all drop the commonly used phrase, "does not effect the image". It is particularly difficult to prove that a chip, haze, schneideritis, rub mark, cleaning mark etc..., does not effect the image, unless exacting and precise measurements were taken before and after the damage.

    Manufacturers of lenses know that careful control and precision have a significant effect on quality of a lenses' image. We can deduce from this that the issues listed above, will very likely have a negative effect on an image. To what degree? That is hard to assess. But "no effect", is extremely unlikely.

    It is fair to say, "image remains sharp and contrasty", "image seems sharp compared to lenses without this issue", "I see no evidence that this has a significant effect on the images it produces".

  2. #2
    William Whitaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    NE Tennessee
    Posts
    1,423

    Re: "Does not effect image"

    Besides, it's grammatically wrong.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,856

    Re: "Does not effect image"

    I think we can count on people learning the difference between "effect" and "affect" when they have learned when an apostrophe belongs before an "s". That is, not in this world, ever.
    Thanks, but I'd rather just watch:
    Large format: http://flickr.com/michaeldarnton
    Mostly 35mm: http://flickr.com/mdarnton
    You want digital, color, etc?: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradofear

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    954

    Re: "Does not effect image"

    Quote Originally Posted by mdarnton View Post
    I think we can count on people learning the difference between "effect" and "affect" when they have learned when an apostrophe belongs before an "s". That is, not in this world, ever.
    Most grammarians miss the point for the period.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    8,476

    Re: "Does not effect image"

    I muved this thred.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,483

    Re: "Does not effect image"

    Quote Originally Posted by mdarnton View Post
    I think we can count on people learning the difference between "effect" and "affect" when they have learned when an apostrophe belongs before an "s". That is, not in this world, ever.
    Charles' dog bit Michael.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    4,431

    Re: "Does not effect image"

    Goerz got it right in 1915, when they said "The presence of a few air bubbles does not in any way affect the work of the lens." There have been a lot of tests with horrible, cracked, scratched, chipped lenses, which show they create perfect photos.


  8. #8

    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Posts
    3,804

    Re: "Does not effect image"

    Quote Originally Posted by Toyon View Post
    Most grammarians miss the point for the period.
    No they don't. Most people who use sloppy, incorrect language fail to clearly communicate their point(s).

  9. #9
    Mark Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Stuck inside of Tucson with the Neverland Blues again...
    Posts
    6,269

    Re: "Does not effect image"

    Quote Originally Posted by goamules View Post
    There have been a lot of tests with horrible, cracked, scratched, chipped lenses, which show they create perfect photos.
    But if you check those tests, you'll notice the light is always from well behind the lens. If you shoot into the light, all those little chips and scratches light up and lower the contrast.
    "I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,856

    Re: "Does not effect image"

    http://kurtmunger.com/dirty_lens_articleid35.html
    The light isn't well behind in these.
    Thanks, but I'd rather just watch:
    Large format: http://flickr.com/michaeldarnton
    Mostly 35mm: http://flickr.com/mdarnton
    You want digital, color, etc?: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradofear

Similar Threads

  1. How does "staning" developers like Pyrocat HD or others effect printing?
    By stradibarrius in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 16-Jan-2015, 19:25
  2. What is the "AURA" effect with IR film?
    By sanking in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 17-Dec-2010, 11:44
  3. "Just like being there" effect on Panoramic prints
    By NicolasArg in forum On Photography
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 9-May-2010, 17:23

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •