On Wed, 03 Dec 1997 20:38:08 GMT, address@bottom.of.post (Eric
Lightman) wrote:

>In article <34849deb.5803759@news.psci.net>, ewindell@psci.net wrote:
>>Most photographic scenes will have objects at varying distances, and
>>no camera computer will ever be able to read the photographer's mind
>>and "know" which of these objects the photographer would like to have
>>in focus.
>
>What about eye-focus control? I know that it's not exactly like the camera is
>reading our mind, but it definitely seems like a step in the right direction..
>>--
>lightman "at" his.com
>http://www.his.com/~lightman

Eric,

Autofocus has no "right direction," and never will. With eye-focus
control, the photographer can not look at anything in the viewfinder
without that object being focused on, even if it isn't the main
subject. In effect, the camera controls what the photographer may
look at. When the photographer engages autofocus lock, this requires
an additional step to over-ride the autofocus system. And if one must
take additional steps to keep the system from "hunting" for the main
subject, then of what value is autofocus?

I won't argue that autofocus isn't fine for shooting snapshots of
mundane subjects. But this can be done just as well with a fixed
focus, disposable camera. And don't fixed focus and autofocus cameras
seek to accomplish the same thing - relieving the camera operator of
the judgement and effort required to focus the lens?

Manually focusing the lens is the easiest part of photography. It is
part of the creative process, not a problem which requires fixing. If
the photographer is willing to surrender his subjective judgement
about focus to a computer algorithm, I doubt he is giving much thought
to depth of field either.

Likewise, we could say that programmed exposure modes allow camera
operators who are totally ignorant of the effects of various apertures
and shutter speeds to obtain a well exposed picture under virtually
any lighting conditions.

It seems obvious to me that autofocus, programmed exposure cameras are
designed for wealthy chimpanzees - and not for thoughtful, creative,
discriminating and skilled people. Perhaps the next technological
innovation will be a camera computer algorithm which tells the camera
operator what type of film he should be using. Or maybe the
manufacturers will determine that, like focusing the lens, making film
choices is simply to difficult - and decide for us that ISO 400 color
negative film is adequate for all purposes and stop making anything
else. I'm sure the chimpanzees wouldn't complain, or even notice.

Gene Windell
ewindell@psci.net