Nov 6, 2003
Recent discussions have made me want to get something absolutely clear in my mind. Am I right that, except in historical and mythological accounts, the number 72 (or 72-96) should have _no_ (i.e., none whatsoever, not even the slightest) role in the practice of digital photography? It has significance neither for the screen nor for printing. Is this right? Is it not further correct that the number 72 is neither simply ‘dated’ nor ‘harmless’, but rather timelessly evil. It never had a legitimate function and it is positively harmful, since it is based on a serious confusion that hinders attempts to understand the processes of digital photography. Shouldn’t people who invoke the number 72 be treated like violators of a taboo: quickly isolated and put through a purifcation process? Shouldn’t there be no sympathy for the devil? –Paul B.