I think the easy way to check out the usage is to use the word as an adverb and see if it still works. That is, is a silver-halide print a photographic print, is an inkjet print a photographic print? Then use it as a adverb. Is a silver-halide print photographically produced? Is an inkjet print photographically produced? I think the answer is obvious when you do that.
Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto ----- Original Message ----- From: "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 3:59 AM Subject: Definition of photography - a serious question > It seems to me that a large number of people is not happy with the > current dictionary definition of the word "photography". It appears that > they would like it to include more than the traditional prints obtained > "on sensitized surfaces by the chemical action of light". > > So, here is a serious question. If *you* had to write a contemporary > dictionary definition for "photography", what would it be ? There's only > one rule to it (as for any definition): it has to be at the same time > inclusive (i.e. include everything that should be called photograph) and > exclusive (i.e. exclude everything that should not be called so). > > Any takes ? > > cheers, > caveman >
