On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 06:42:31 +0100, Rob Morley <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>In article <rsn504hpg7u76h9e0dt6100o75b0qg8ldo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, tony cooper
>tony_cooper213@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 04:19:49 +0100, Rob Morley <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <2dg50411fl4pdfkajovcppqqpbbelhnp3a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, tony cooper
>> >tony_cooper213@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>> >> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 02:55:46 +0100, Rob Morley <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Are you being intentionally obtuse? There are no objects involved
in
>> >> the focal plane other than the point on the camera where the focal
>> >> plane is determined. That is a point, and not a surface. The plane
>> >> is not an object and the line is not an object. The plane is based
on
>> >> an intersection point.
>> >
>> >Is that supposed to make sense?
>>
>> I didn't expect it to...to you.
>
>OK, lets try again. You know that little mark on the top of your
>camera, a circle with a line through it? Extend the line to the width
>of the camera, then move it vertically to the bottom of the camera. The
>points through which the line passes make up part of the focal plane.
>Open up the camera and what do you find there? A film or image sensor.
>A real actual 2-dimensional surface that coincides with the focal plane
>you just extrapolated from the little symbol on the top
You are getting close, but still not quite there. There is a surface
within the camera, but the plane passes across that surface just as
the line extends. The focal plane is still the focal plane where it
is not passing across the surface. You are making progress because
you originally said "Possibly because it's bollocks. For a start, a
plane is a plane, not a line" and now you've extended your thinking to
include the concept of a line.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
|
