The End for Manual Control?

After owning a Panasonic TZ1 for a while now I haven't missed the loss of
manual controls f-stop or shutter-speed and am very pleased with the various
pre-programmed scene modes. Will software like the TZ1 uses eventually make
the old concept of manual control obsolete? Is there a new Control Language
for picture taking that could develop beyond the simple f-stop/shutter-speed
paradigm?

Would you want manual controls on the human eye? Modern cameras will
eventually become as automatic as the human eye.

NM

"~~NoMad~~" wrote in message
...
After owning a Panasonic TZ1 for a while now I haven't missed the loss of
manual controls f-stop or shutter-speed and am very pleased with the
various pre-programmed scene modes. Will software like the TZ1 uses
eventually make the old concept of manual control obsolete? Is there a new
Control Language for picture taking that could develop beyond the simple
f-stop/shutter-speed paradigm?

Would you want manual controls on the human eye? Modern cameras will
eventually become as automatic as the human eye.

NM


Oh Yeh.

The Human eyes are controlled by the Human Brain which is in very close
contact with them. The human brain is vastly more intelligent than any
Computer. It can still match "Super Computers" at chess.

However these Super Computers are Single Task Machines, and are still unable
to move the Chess Pieces for themselves, or getting themselves up to the 6th
Floor in order to start playing the Game, never mind controlling their own
self contained energy generating systems, while they are doing that. Almost
any normally intelligent human can do that without even giving it a thought.

When we see a Super Computer which can do that, then we might be getting
close to the sort of intelligence required.

Shortly after that event we might get a portable Camera, which can make the
same sort of decisions that an intelligent photographer can.

Until then, there we will just have to make do with Auto Exposure controls,
and over-ride them when we know we need to.

Roy G

~~NoMad~~ wrote:
After owning a Panasonic TZ1 for a while now I haven't missed the loss of
manual controls f-stop or shutter-speed and am very pleased with the various
pre-programmed scene modes. Will software like the TZ1 uses eventually make
the old concept of manual control obsolete? Is there a new Control Language
for picture taking that could develop beyond the simple f-stop/shutter-speed
paradigm?

Would you want manual controls on the human eye? Modern cameras will
eventually become as automatic as the human eye.

NM
--
For those who just to take snapshots, full automatic is fine. However,
for those who want creative control there will always be manual. It'
difficult to put human imagination on automatic.
Bill in Lake Charles

~~NoMad~~ wrote:
After owning a Panasonic TZ1 for a while now I haven't missed the loss of
manual controls f-stop or shutter-speed and am very pleased with the various
pre-programmed scene modes. Will software like the TZ1 uses eventually make
the old concept of manual control obsolete? Is there a new Control Language
for picture taking that could develop beyond the simple f-stop/shutter-speed
paradigm?

Would you want manual controls on the human eye? Modern cameras will
eventually become as automatic as the human eye.

NM

What the camera can not do for you is decide what depth of field you
want.
There times when you want to greatly limit the DOF so that the subject
stands out
from the background. Then there are time you want it all in focus, how
is the camera
to know what you want.

Scott

"~~NoMad~~" wrote

[...] Is there a new Control Language for picture taking that could
develop beyond the simple f-stop/shutter-speed paradigm?

Uh, and focus? Color correction? Polarization?

Would you want manual controls on the human eye?

The human eye is part of the human brain.
Would you want automatic control of the human brain?

Modern cameras will eventually become as automatic as the human eye.

It already is for those who wish to live on automatic - they are easily
satisfied, wish no creativity.

"~~NoMad~~" wrote in message
...
After owning a Panasonic TZ1 for a while now I haven't missed the loss of
manual controls f-stop or shutter-speed and am very pleased with the
various pre-programmed scene modes. Will software like the TZ1 uses
eventually make the old concept of manual control obsolete? Is there a new
Control Language for picture taking that could develop beyond the simple
f-stop/shutter-speed paradigm?

Would you want manual controls on the human eye? Modern cameras will
eventually become as automatic as the human eye.

NM




So, you're saying that you want a camera that totally doesn't need you?
That is, it can make all decisions including WHAT to photograph and order
its own replacement supplies (like the LG net-connected refrigerator)...so,
why would this camera want to hang with you???? ;-) If they added the
speech abilities of even the old 1980's Minolta RF cameras, it just MIGHT
call you a loser and leave!

Seriously, the reason for keeping manual control ability would be to allow
you to do things the designers didn't anticipate or don't handle the way you
want.

George
(waiting for the day that the toaster insults me)

Oh Yeh.

The Human eyes are controlled by the Human Brain which is in very close
contact with them. The human brain is vastly more intelligent than any
Computer. It can still match "Super Computers" at chess.

Only a few human brains can match "Super Computers" at chess, most
human brains can not.


However these Super Computers are Single Task Machines, and are still
unable to move the Chess Pieces for themselves, or getting themselves up
to the 6th

There are Chess computers which can move the Chess Pieces for themselves.
I have seen them about 20 years ago, but there is not to much interest in
Chess computers which can move the Pieces for themselves.

Floor in order to start playing the Game, never mind controlling their own
self contained energy generating systems, while they are doing that.
Almost any normally intelligent human can do that without even giving it a
thought.

When we see a Super Computer which can do that, then we might be getting
close to the sort of intelligence required.

There is not very much intelligence involved in controlling the eye's, loads
of
animals with a 'fairly' simple brain can do that. Predetors have 'fairly'
simple
brains and a very 'focused' eye.


Shortly after that event we might get a portable Camera, which can make
the same sort of decisions that an intelligent photographer can.

Not likely, because the human eye in combination with the brain focuses on
only
a very small part of the scene. And can change that within the scene from
time to
time. A picture is a 'snapshot' of the complete scene where there is only
one set
of parameters for the 'whole' picture. The computer very probably will not
be able
to distinguis between what is important to us in the picture as we human's
can.


Until then, there we will just have to make do with Auto Exposure
controls, and over-ride them when we know we need to.

Humans probably will stay in control for how we crop the real world,
what should be in focus and what not. And what is emotional important
to us.



Roy G

"Bill K" wrote in message
--
For those who just to take snapshots, full automatic is fine. However,
for those who want creative control there will always be manual.



Much Medium Format, and virtually all Large Format, uses manual control.
The sun does not rise and set on the needs of 35mm and digital
photographers.

Carl Zeiss is releasing new lenses that are fully manual (for all of us that
haven't heard the news that "FILM IS DEAD!") The Zeiss Ikon system will use
the Leica M mount, and the lenses are reportedly works of art, with high
resolution and beautiful bokeh. In addition, Zeiss is releasing a series of
SLR lenses in Nikon mount (now that Nikon is withdrawing from manual lens
production) and they will have a parallel series in M42 mount, which can be
adapted to fit a wide range of SLRs.

Perhaps someone should tell Zeiss that no one wants those old-fashioned
dinosaurs anymore.

Sometimes these "XXX is Dead" posts are humorous. I'm not about to abandon
my classic SMC Takumar and SMC Pentax lenses in favor of some lightweight,
plastic-barreled zoom lenses, that are prone to become damaged if dropped
even one time.

"Scott W" writes:

What the camera can not do for you is decide what depth of field you want.
There times when you want to greatly limit the DOF so that the subject
stands out from the background. Then there are time you want it all in
focus, how is the camera to know what you want.

Similarly, the camera can't know whether you want a shutter speed fast
enough to stop all motion in the scene, or one that shows a controlled
amount of blurring of moving objects.

When the scene dynamic range exceeds that of the camera (and this isn't
unusual outdoors), the camera can only guess whether it should try to
capture the highlights and sacrifice shadows, or capture the shadow
areas and lose the highlights.

The photographer knows what they care about in the scene; the camera
does not.

Dave

"george" wrote in message
...

"~~NoMad~~" wrote in message
...
After owning a Panasonic TZ1 for a while now I haven't missed the loss of
manual controls f-stop or shutter-speed and am very pleased with the
various pre-programmed scene modes. Will software like the TZ1 uses
eventually make the old concept of manual control obsolete? Is there a
new Control Language for picture taking that could develop beyond the
simple f-stop/shutter-speed paradigm?

Would you want manual controls on the human eye? Modern cameras will
eventually become as automatic as the human eye.

NM




So, you're saying that you want a camera that totally doesn't need you?
That is, it can make all decisions including WHAT to photograph and order
its own replacement supplies (like the LG net-connected
refrigerator)...so, why would this camera want to hang with you???? ;-)
If they added the speech abilities of even the old 1980's Minolta RF
cameras, it just MIGHT call you a loser and leave!

Seriously, the reason for keeping manual control ability would be to allow
you to do things the designers didn't anticipate or don't handle the way
you want.

George
(waiting for the day that the toaster insults me)
Hi.

You have just come with another example of why this automation lark can only
go so far.

Toasters. They have had some sort of automatic pop-up browning control
since I can remember, and they keep upgrading the automation. BUT the toast
still gets burned with unfailing regularity.

Roy G