Worst Photographic Buzzword

[Brian C. Miller]

OMG! I don't believe it... another non-TV watcher.

My TV died at 12 years old. I gave it an appropriate funeral by tossing it in a Dumpster, and I never bothered to replace it. At the time I was halfway through Casa Blanca, and I'd never seen it before.

I guess quacks attract quacks don't they.

The word you are looking for is "flock."

Yeah, I'd agree. It's sort of like listening to wine experts talking about "Fruity, with a strong hint of oak lined cat box." Or something similarly incomprehensible.

Actually, it's a good way to differentiate various things like coffee and wine. As noted elsewhere, I roast my own coffee, and the various varieties are quite different from each other when you have a good cup in front of you. The individual tastes are completely lost in a latté, though. It's rather like describing the grain difference between Tmax, Tri-X, Plus-X, and Verichrome.

[Vaughn]

My TV died at 12 years old. I gave it an appropriate funeral by tossing it in a Dumpster, and I never bothered to replace it.

My last TV died in the late 70's...it was a Sony 10" portable, so it fit into the trash can. But in all honesty, in many ways I think a computer and the internet are much worse than a TV ever was. Yet here I am. At least with TV I sat farther way from it.

[Brian C. Miller]

So, what's the absolute worst photographic bogeyman? You know, the buzzword people talk about all the time and fear, but has little if any relationship to actual photography.

Actually, you've defined two topics for the thread. One is a "bogeyman," which is something that may fear, and the other is the worst buzzword.

Various bogeymen (bokehmen?) pop up, but what they represent are only important in very small areas.

Tripod stability: When all I had was a Benbo Trekker, this was a real issue. This is no longer an issue with with a Bogen 3036.

Grain aliasing: Not a problem for me. My scanner isn't that good.

Rendering: Eh, not a good use of the word to describe what a lens does. I tend to think of a meat processing plant or POV-Ray. The definition of the verb form has a pretty wide range, including coating with plaster or cement.

3D Look: Use two lenses, and maybe those red-blue glasses. Otherwise, just open up your lens. This looks like a real bogeyman.

Optimized for 1:1: Well, if you are doing serious macrophotography and you have the money for the specialist lens, then it's important. Otherwise, just stretch those bellows! (Some discussions mention that the same lens was marketed different ways. I would have thought that "optimized for 1:1" and "landscape lens" were at odds with each other.)

Reciprocity failure: This is a real issue depending on what film you are using. Some films are superlative, some are horrendous. Just leave the lens open longer than a second and find out...

Film flatness: There was a sort-of-recent thread about that, where the poster had problems with the image being out of focus in the center. The film wasn't staying flat. Real problem during cold weather.

Circle of confusion: Man, DOF and aperture bites! This is a tricky thing to understand, but it must be understood.

Diffraction: Aperture bites again, but diffraction is something that every photographer should test for with their lenses. Just a quick test, a few sheets of film, and then go forth and photograph. (I.e., is what you see really a problem for you? I think my Wollensak is just fine in the center at f/45. YMMV.)

[Scratched Glass]

PIC is short for picture. "I love your pic"

[Steve M Hostetter]

You sank my battleship!! has nothing to do with photography

Hostilux

best word to describe photography = evanescence

[E. von Hoegh]

Yeah, I'd agree. It's sort of like listening to wine experts talking about "Fruity, with a strong hint of oak lined cat box." Or something similarly incomprehensible.


Kent in SD

Funny you should mention that.
"Bokeh" and "bouquet" have so many similarities.... they both attempt to describe something that cannot adequately be described but must be experienced. Words just don't do it. I've heard a few folks wax idiotic trying to describe the bouquet of a wine, and I'm sure folks do the same trying to distinguish between the OOFAs of, say, a Dagor and a Tessar. Just whip out some prints. Personally, I've never paid much attention to OOFAs and have never made a print of a decent composition where they detract from the subject. They're out of focus for a reason. One of my buddies had a wine snob brother-in-law. He'd spend five minutes describing the wine he was about to drink. We refilled a bottle of Rhine white with something cheap out of a jug; same monologue. He didn't know wine, he just knew how to bull$**t about wine.

[evan clarke]

"Slow methodical workflow" Even with my 11x14, I want to make the photograph while it still exists not 5 minutes later...

[cjbroadbent]

Art

[BrianShaw]

Tilley.

Not really a buzzword, but something "photographic" I dislike.

[Alan Davenport]

Absolute WORST photographic buzzword (though it's not used much in LF circles) is "Prime Lens." Poster child for the misuse and repurposing of technical terms because people don't understand what the hell it means, or because they simply like the way it rolls off the tongue.