I tried asking this on another forum. So far, no response, so I'll try asking here.
Probably the two greatest modern inventions: the ability to capture sound and image. The former captures sound waves, "etching" them onto a cylinder and later a disk and later on being able to play it back. The latter captures light, captures the image as is and etches it onto a light sensitive paper. Both of these things however were invented only 200-300 years ago.
Could they have been invented much earlier, say the medieval period, where some civilizations had some 'advanced' knowledge of alchemy (examples include alchemy in Islamic world and gunpowder in China)? And at least for photography, the concept of camera obscura already existed, all that was needed was knowledge of certain chemicals that react to light. Though for sound recording, it's much trickier.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IrzvW7HI1lUQZkdkQUgcOP_s1bEhVxEZxDC2Y4-TzY4/edit?usp=sharing
Looking for some helpful in advice in
- spelling and grammar
- refining my conclusion paragraph
- Anything that seems worded weirdly or confusing
- Anything else of concern
I apologize in advance as it is rather long
Thank you
In need of this paper 4 pages double spaced. Please PM me if this is doable.
Auto focus
[removed]
I'm tired of people coming here and complaining about the beautiful photos people post of our state. If you don't like them, GTFO!
Imagine those kids seeing photos of their naked moms and their crowning vaginas. Talk about trauma. Birth isn't beautiful, it's messy and painful and smelly. Taking cute newborn pictures is awesome, but having someone photograph your vaginal tearing or your baby's head coming out of you? That's just gross. The people who frame those photos or who do uncensored birth videos are even worse.
So I got a 3 month Adobe Creative Cloud Photography Plan (Photoshop & Lightroom), and as I already have both, I thought I'd give it away.
Just leave a comment below and I will randomly choose a winner via redditraffler within the next 12-48 hours (not sure when I'll have time to do this). The code will be PM'd to the winner.
EDIT: the giveaway has ended
Street photography to me is amazing, i love it since i discovered Vivian Maier many years ago and now everytime i travel i take the chance to practice that as much as i can with decent results most of the times.
I started with a Nikon SLR, it was bulky and the worst stealth camera ever but i've learned a lot from it, then i bought a Sony mirrorless camera and things got better, it was smaller and took better pictures and nowaday it is still my main camera when i travel.
But in my last trip something happened, i forgot my backup batteries at home and with just one battery everyday at 2pm the fun was over, so i did the most obvious thing ever and i started using my smartphone instead.
My Sony has better image quality, better lens and more functions but after a while i started to appreciate my smartphone a lot and taking street photos with that was amazing: it's small, has a good quality (i shot in RAW), it fits in my pockets, while using it nobody cared about me and i looked like a tourist taking selfies and boring travel pictures.
I actually started to think about that, is mobile the future of street photography?
What do you think about it?
Nowadays I'm sure a huge percentage of people know what the president of the United States at any given time looks like, but I imagine this is largely due to the proliferation of photographic and televised media. Before all that, say, for example, in the 1700s, how easy was it to propagate an image to a group of people who would never see their leaders in person? I imagine portraits would be the main method of accomplishing this, but how easily were they mass-produced back then? Did people even bother? And what about in the 1600s or 1500s or even earlier?
