The ability to produce high-quality images makes continuous-tone printers appropriate for numerous applications. For instance, graphic designers and service bureaus can use them as digital proofing devices for color Post-script output, while photographers can use them as an alternative to the traditional photo lab, especially in situations where the image must be touched up using image-editing software.
Meanwhile, in the general business world, they can be used to produce employee identification cards and other sensitive documents that are difficult to reproduce, and artists can use them as an output medium for color illustrations produced on a computer. In all of these applications, the continuous-tone printer has a substantial quality advantage over color printers using conventional thermal-transfer technology.
At the moment, vendors are taking several different approaches to developing continuous-tone printers. Most contone color printers use what is known as dye-sublimation thermal-transfer technology. A thermal print head transfers dye from a donor material to the paper or film on which the image is to be printed. The dye is evaporated from the donor material by thermal resistors, and then solidifies (sublimes) on the paper. Unlike conventional thermal-transfer printers, which produce different colors using a dithering technique, dye-sublimation printers can vary the color value of each individual spot by controlling the amount of heat. However, the technology is limited to printing on transparency film or a special kind of thermal paper.
At least one manufacturer, Iris Graphics (Bedford, MA), offers a series of continuous-tone color printers that use ink-jet technology. Iris says that it produces continuous-tone images by laying down variable-sized dots with an effective resolution of 1200 to 1500 dots per inch. This technology offers the advantage of being able to print on nearly any kind of medium.
A third type of technology, based on a liquid-crystal light valve, is used in a photographic printer from Ilford Photo (Paramus, NJ). The Ilford Digital Photo Imager prints on traditional photographic media, including glossy or matte paper (up to 8 1/2-by-11 inches), transparency film, or 35mm slide film. It offers a resolution of 300 dpi with 24-bit color (16.7 million colors). The price of the unit begins at under $60,000.
Eastman Kodak became one of the first vendors to offer a contone printer when it introduced the XL7700 dye-sublimation printer in 1988. With its 11-by-11-inch imaging area, this printer became popular with graphic designers and digital photographers because they now had a way of outputting computer-generated or computer-enhanced images onto photographic paper to produce samples of their work. Kodak also sold a version of the product into the industrial security market. Teamed with a video camera, digitizer, and image database software, the XL7700 proved to be a viable option for producing identification cards.
Priced at about $25,000, the XL7700 features 200dpi resolution and includes a 12M frame buffer for image storage. It also has a digital signal processor for image enhancement and scaling operations and can print 256 levels for each dot in each color, good for up to 16.7 million colors. To get best results, Kodak recommends you use its Ektatherm media.
Another early manufacturer of dye-sublimation printers was Du Pont (Newark, DE). The company’s 4Cast printer was the first Postscript-based, continuous-tone color printer on the market. Because offits Postscript compatibility, Du Pont targeted the 4Cast at the graphic arts market, including desktop publishing service bureaus. The initial price–nearly $80,000– and its slow output speed limited its early acceptance. But in 1991, Du Pont introduced a new version of the printer that offers better-quality images and a wider output format of 12.2-by-17.3 inches. The price is now $48,000 for the base model and $55,000 for a Macintosh version. The printer provides Postscript output in addition to supporting the DDES and CT2T tape formats, two standards widely used in the traditional color separation business.
One graphic arts service bureau that purchased the Du Pont 4Cast is Desktop Publishing & Computer, in Glendale, California. DP&C’s customers include graphic designers and advertising agencies who use the 4Cast to produce comps–full-color mock-ups of ad materials or package designs. DP&C charges customers $50 per color print. “The 4Cast is perfect for 90 percent of the comps and packaging applications our clients have,” says Vic Avedissian, DP&C president. “It helps them make a good first impression with their clients–much better than they’d get with other color printers.”
But Avedissian doesn’t recommend the 4Cast as a replacement for traditional color proofing systems, such as Du Pont’s Cromalins or 3M’s MatchPrint. The reason is that the printer does not perfectly match the colors present in the original image, unless the user touches them up first with an image-editing program. “If you blindly give your floppy disk to a 4Cast service bureau, you might find that your images come out too dark,” Avedissian says.
One manufacturer of continuous-tone printers that gets higher marks as a proofing system is Iris Graphics, a division of Scitex. Inkjet contone technology is expensive, but it offers the ability to print on a variety of media. This helps make it a more reliable proofing system, since the combination of ink on paper can correspond closely to the ink and paper used on the printing press.
Iris offers three models: the 3024, the 3047, and the SmartJet 4012. The 3024 and 3047 are large-format (24-by-24 inches and up) printers with equally large price tags of $84,500 and more. The 4012, with its $39,000 list price and 10.6-by-17.2-inch imaging area, is aimed squarely at graphic design studios and service bureaus who need a fast, reliable, digital proofing mechanism. It provides Postscript compatibility through CAI’s Freedom of Press, a software-based Postscript clone interpreter.
The SmartJet 4012 was the choice of another Los Angeles-area service bureau, RPI, in Culver City, California. “It produces wonderful images,” says RPI president Bill Swann, who charges $40 to $60 per print. Still, Swann feels that the printer is best suited for producing page comps and limited-distribution originals. “Digital proofing is tenuous at best,” he says. “Our customers still like to see a proof produced directly from their film separations.”
Al Lucchese, president and CEO of Iris Graphics, acknowledges that some customers are reluctant to move toward digital proofs, but he feels their hesitance is based on psychological factors, rather than quality factors. “Some people are reluctant to give up the old way of doing things,” he says. “But we have a number of users who use Iris printer output as a ‘contract’ proof for printing jobs.”
This past year, several manufacturers have attracted attention with new continuous-tone printers that offer either a lower price or higher output quality. Some, such as Mitsubishi and Seiko, are wellknown to computer graphics users. Others, such as Texnai, are not so well-known–but they could establish a name for themselves, given the capabilities of their products.
Mitsubishi’s CHC-S445, introduced last July, is a 300dpi dye-sublimation printer manufactured by Shinko Electric. Features include a 24-bit color palette (meaning each dot can be one of 16.7 million colors), a Centronics parallel interface, and a maximum image area of 8 1/2-by-11 inches. Users have the option of adding a 130M hard disk to buffer and spool images. A Postscript-compatible option sold with the printer includes a 13M PC expansion board or a Macintosh RPS box with a Postscript clone called PowerPage from Pipeline Associates (Morris Plains, NJ).
PowerPage offers some capabilities not found in Postscript, such as a rendering technique called PowerBanding that reduces memory requirements for printed images and an anti-aliasing technique that improves the appearance of fonts (anti-aliasing is the process of smoothing jagged edges by filling them in with gray dots). But users who see the printer as a proofing device for Postscript may balk at acquiring a clone.
The printer’s base price is $17,999. With the Postscript option, the printer costs $20,500 for the PC version and $23,500 for the Macintosh version. The latter includes an AppleTalk port. A version that includes Sun-compatible driver software (but no Postscript) costs $18,250 and is compatible with any Sun workstation with VMEBus or SBus architectures.
Seiko’s Professional ColorPoint VS, also announced last summer, is another 300dpi dye-sublimation printer. It can print 64 levels of intensity for cyan, yellow, magenta, and black, enough for 262,000 colors per printable spot. The controller includes a custom chip that allows the printer to simulate a full 24-bit (16.7 million) color palette.
The Seiko printer has an attractive price tag of $19,999, but its usefulness for graphic artists is limited by its lack of Postscript support. This is essentially a video printer, designed to reproduce images that appear on the computer screen. There are no software drivers to install, only a QuickCapture video interface that prints at the press of a button a continuous-tone color hard copy of the computer display. The printer does include an edge enhancement function to sharpen or smooth color transitions, as well as a fractional scalling feature that automatically enlarges the image to fill the page. However, Seiko is aiming its printer largely at the engineering, scientific visualization, and medical imaging markets rather than graphic arts.
Nikon Strikes Again
Nikon’s compression coprocessor can compress publication-size images to 1/40 of their file size in seconds using standard JPEG baseline methods. Reportedly, this compression allows faster transmission times using regular phone lines with modems instead of direct digital links, such as ISDN, Accunet, or T1.
The wideband multichannel receiver, a fully automated NuBus card, features an intelligent communications coprocessor that can be used to receive more than one transmission channel simultaneously. Additionally, full compatibility with CCITT, UPI, AP, and other wirephoto standards are built in. It functions independently and in the background of the host Macintosh operating system.
The 22-pound, fully automated, 35mm, color direct telephoto transmitter is designed specifically for field use and enables both digital and analog transmission of 35mm color negative and positive film.
According to the company, the LS-3500 film scanner is the first unit to provide true desktop color separations of standard reproduction quality. It reads color or monochrome 35mm film positives and negatives at a resolution of up to 6144-by-4096 pixels.
A CP-3000 printer reproduces color photographs at a resolution of 1024-by-1280 pixels through the use of thermal dye diffusion printing techology. With this product, it takes less than three minutes to print a full A5 copy on paper or transparency.
And finally, the Nikon HQ-1500C high-definition still camera captures electronic still photographs at a rate of 1/3 second per frame and provides 100 perecnt error-free color registration, reports Nikon.
Nikon offers the IMS in three packages. The entry-level package includes the LS-3500 scanner, the compression board, and PictureDesk software bundled with Photoshop or Nikon’s ColorFlex software. The price ranges from $12,000 to $15,000.
The communications package consists of all the components in the entry-level package plus two high-speed modems and an additional compression board. The price range for this package is $17,000 to $20,000.
The third package is called the Nikon NewsDesk and includes the communications package plus the wideband receiver. The price ranges from $20,000 to $30,000.
The telephoto transmitter and the HQ-1500C can be configured separately in other packages.
Elements of the IMS have been in use at The San Francisco Examiner for some time now. Chris Gulker, photo editor for the daily newspaper, says that when he started working there about a year and a half ago, his mission was to make The Examiner a color photo newspaper. Since that time, the paper has made good use of the LS-3500 scanner and the compression boards and software. Gulker notes that these components have “permitted The Examiner to go color for about 1/10 or less the cost that would have otherwise been require.”
He says that, although there is room for improvement, the compression technology “allows better quality in six minutes than was previously available in 30 minutes.” The newspaper is using this technology to handle on-the-road transmissions. Gulker notes that, “Photographers here are refusing to take the old transmitters.”
The Deliciousness Of The Fotovix
I’ve lusted after a Barneyscan ever since I saw a prototype a couple of years back (I own four camera bodies and take thousands of pictures each year — some of them are even good). And the Barneyscan does an excellent job of converting 35mm slides into 24-bit-color graphic images.
Then last year I saw a Nikon scanner in action. If anything, it did an even better job of translating film into computer-manipulable bits. wouldn’t be great if I could combine my semiprofessional photography habit with my day-to-day Mac use? Wouldn’t it be great if I could put together a CD-ROM disc full of stock photos that Mac users could use wihtout fee or special license? Wouldn’t it be great if I didn’t keep having these dreams that seem to involve $10,000 or more worth of equipment?
She's a Beauty!
My dream was going to have to stay unfulfilled, or so my bank said. I couldn’t afford a Barneyscan or a Nikon 35mm scanner (priced in the same league as a compact car, and my credit line wasn’t exactly unencumbered — there were those four camera bodies to pay off, for example). And the option of taking my photos down to a service bureau wasn’t exactly viable, either, because it would take time I didn’t have, and the price per scan is usually quite stiff (after all, the bureau has to pay off the many thousands of dollars it’s invested in equipment, doesn’t it?). The money I would pay the local service bureau to scan enough slides to fill a CD-ROM disc would be enough to pay fot the scanner itself.
So I resigned myself to having pleasant, albeit expensive, dreams — until I found the Tamron Fotovix, that is.
I came across the Fotovix quite by accident. Tamron (P.O. Box 388, 99 Seaview Blvd., Port Washington, NY 11050; [800] 827-8880 or [516] 484-8880) is one of the better-known Japanese photographic-equipment companies. Someone there apparently desided that photography aficionados desperately needed a way to convert their slides and negatives into video images that they could play on their TV (and, I suppose, record on their VCR). Just why Tamron’s engineers thought this was a big unfulfilled fantasy, I don’t know. Slide shows on videotape are not exactly the goal of any photographer I know.
What Tamron came up with was a small video camera mounted in what looks like a miniature copy stand or slide copier. The unit occupies about 4 x 6 inches and stands about 12 inches tall. Toward the top is a zoom lens with adjustments; at the bottom center is a backlit stage and holder for 35mm slides. Plug the thing in to a TV, turn it on, and insert a slide, and there it is on the TV. Not exactly something you’ve been waiting for, is it?
Nevertheless, the Fotovix is a cute gadget, and Tomron seems to be marketing it as just that: a cute gadget. A few professional photo shops sell it, and you can occasionally find it advertised in photography magazines, but has anyone heard of it in the Mac marketplace? No way, Jose. Besides, for the casual users that Tamron seems to be pushing the Fotovix to, the price is a little on the high side ($899). As a result, the unit attracts little or no attention in the mass market.
But when I first saw a list of the specifications for the Fotovix, something clicked. Perhaps it was because I’d just finished playing with the Canon XapShot (see my January column) when I saw the Fotovix ad. Perhaps it was because I’d been lusting after a Barneyscan so much. Maybe the planets were auspiciously aligned. Whatever the reason, “Gee,” I thought, “if this thing outputs NTSC video, why not plug it into my video digitizer and see what it does?”
So I order one (a review unit — I wasn’t about to spend my own money on this thing until I saw if it worked, and I’ve already told you what my bank said about spending more money). The day it arrived, I plugged it in, stuck in a random slide, and grabbed the image with the Mac.
Five hours later, I had almost filed a Bernoulli cartridge (44 megabytes) with images. The next day, all I did was play with the Fotovix. The day after that, I got out all the photographs I’ve ever taken and started converting them into Macintosh images. I was hooked. Although the Fotovix certainly doesn’t have the quality of the Bareyscan or Nikon scanner, it does a very respectable job and is easy to use that it tempts you to convert judt one more image.
A Closer Look
On the Fotovix III, the amateur model that I used, you get a 3x zoom lens with focus and aperture adjustments. The zoom lets you crop images. The aperture adjustment is more of a video-level adjustment than anything else. You need the focus knob because various types of film emulsions have slightly different heights and slide mounts come in different thicknesses. All three controls are right in front where you can get to them, and the zoom and aperture are controlled by smooth operating levers. The lens is optimized for the close-up (macro) work it does.
Tamron also sells a professional model for $1,899. For some strange reason, it is named the Fotovix IIx (will the next model be called the IIci?). The IIx comes with a 6x zoom for accommodating different sized film formats and for better cropping control and supposedly has higher-caliber lens to boot. I can’t verify this, because I used the amater model only. The pro model also sports a powered zoom (which doesn’t seem to be of much value, although it does add to the price).
On the right side of the Fotovix are the power switch and two additional controls. A switch lets you scan negatives or slides (negatives become positive images with a flick of the switch!). A small joystick — and I mean small — lets you control the color balance (see Figure 1). This joystick, unfortunately, is the only weak point of the Fotovix design. First, there’s no center indent to let you return to the no-color adjustment position. Second, because the joystick is so small, it’s almost impossible to make subtle color adjustments with any precision.
From a cost standpoint,I can understand Tamron’s decision to use the joystick to control color. Frankly, however, I would implore the company to junk that appraoch and use three sliding color controls (red, green, and blue), each with a center indent for neutral color. Tamron will probably argue that the joystick makes sense because you can see the effect as you move it, but I would counter with the assertion that it’s impossible to repeat or even characterize the adjustments you make with the current Fotovix controls.
The backlit imaging platform, on the other hand, is the cleverest part of the Fotovix. You get separate slide and negative carriers, each of which holds five images. These carriers slide into the platform itself, and you move from image to image by sliding the carrier back and forth. The platform has adjustments for moving forward and backward and rotating. Thus, with only three motions — each of which is distinct from the other, by the way — you can position any slide or portion thereof under the lens. Both vertical and horizontal images are easily accomodated. If you have a lot of slides to convert, an auto-slide-feeder accessory is available.
OK, enough of the physical description. You want to know whether this thing works or not and, if so, how well. The short answers are yes and quite well, thank you.
Fotovix’s final image quality is determined in part by your digitizer. I’ve used the modest-resolution digitizer built into the RasterOps 364 video board, so the images I’ve captured aren’t as good as those I could create with a state-of-the-art digitizer. Nevertheless, I’m reasonably pleased. The biggest compaint I have with the setup I’m currently using is that the final image size I can capture is somewhat limited (the RasterOps 364 Framegrabber utility allows only two sizes of image capture, although you can crop either to create smaller images, if necessary). With a high-resolution digitizer, the Fotovix would produce images of much higher quality than those you see accompanying this column.
Nevertheless, the image quality is reasonable. the unit uses a half-inch charge coupled device to capture about 324,000 pixels of resolution. And if you were using the ComputerEyes monochrome digitizer, image quality would certainly be good enough to add black-white photography to your newsletter or report. One caveat: Focusing is critical. Make sure you really do focus every image you scan by zooming in, adjusting the focus, and then zooming back out. If you don’t do this, the small depth of field of this unit will turn nicely focused image into a slightly blurry mush. The translation from film to video sacrifices a bit of sharpness as it is, so proper focus is essential to usable results.
For critical color work, the Fotovix may or may not satisfy you. High-contrast images don’t look as good as well-exposed, lower-contrast ones. the higher the contrast in your original — ans Kodachrome slides tend to be very high contrast — the more you’ll probably find yourself monkeying with the various controls of your digitizer software. I found myself automatically puling down the contrast setting when imaging my slides, and I usually had to fiddle with the brightness, white-level, and black-level setting as well. Fortunately, the color rendition, although certainly not as close to perfection as what the Barneyscan might provide, is usually adequate. Thus, I found myself leaving the color controls alone for most of my images.
Don’t get me wrong, however. Time magazine isn’t going to use the Fotovix to digitize its next cover. The Barneyscan and Nikon scanners have the high-end professional marketplace to themselves, as well as they should. (And I still dream of owning one.) But if you have a modest need for color photographs from time to time, and in less than full-page size, the Fotovix will probably suit you just fine.
Anyway, you can judge the quality for yourself. While on a recent trip to the Great Barrier Reef, I shot a thousand or so slides. The pictures that accompany this articles come from that batch and haven’t been touched up or doctored in any way; I simply grabbed them at 640 x 480 resolution and had the MacUser art department place them onto the page as is. I’ve tried to pick images that illustrate both the good and the bad in the Fotovix’s imaging capabilities. Minor problems can often be corrected with programs such as Adobe’s Photoshop or Letraset’s Image Studio. And remember, a better digitizer would give you better results.
Tamron’s documentation leaves a lot to be desired. One thing that should have been noted, which I discovered only by trial and error, is that high ambient light level wash out the colors in images. The backlit screen on the Fotovix lights at a very modest level, and sunlight or other light falling on the platforms has a tendency to overwhelm the backlight. Because the backlight is balanced for the video pickup, the ambient light not only lowers the contrast of the photo being imaged but often changes color renditions as well. Tamron could have added a little back curtain around the platform to help keep out extraneous light. As soon as I return the evaluation unit and purchase my own Fotovix, I intend to add Velcro fasteners at the top of the unit and make my own black curtain to hang from them. The Velcro will make it easy to remove the curtain while adjusting the image position and to put it back on while I’m digitizing the image.
As you probably tell, my complaints are pretty picky. Indeed, the things I’d change on the Fotovix would make it less of a consumer-oriented product and more of a professional-user-type product. The image quality you can judge for yourself, but I’m satisfied with the results so far and hope to add a higher-resolution digitizer in the near future.
A Photo Opportunity
Which brings me back to the reason I sought out the Fotovix in the first place. You’ve seen some of my photos (I do mostly nature photography, but I also have a fair collection of other types of shots). How many of you MacUser readers would be interested in a CD-ROM disc of hundreds of stock photographic images for $49.95? Although I’d retain copyright to the images, I’d grant you the right to use them in any desktop-publishing, multi-media, or art project you might be working on. If you’re interested in such a product, drop me a line at Macreations, 329 Horizon Way, Pacifica, CA 94044.
If enough MacUser readers contact me to let me cover the cost of producing the CD-ROM discs, I’ll do it and let you know how to get your copy. Obviously, I’m not out to make a profit on this project. Instead, I’mtrying to encourage users to enliven their work with good graphics and also (I hope) to prove to other organizations that there is a demand for this sort of disc. I don’t see any reason why a disc of digitized stock shots should cost $300 or more — the resolution isn’t good enough to supplant offerings of the professional stock agencies.
As longtime readers of my columns may remember, I’m a fan of the idea behind CD-ROM but I’m still quite chagrined at the reality of the marketplace. I’d love to replace my bookshelves of reference works with CD-ROM discs, and I’d love to have a small library of stock images with which I can jazz up my work. This project combines something I like doing — photography — with something I want to see happen — low-cost reference and library works on CD-ROM disc.
Meanwhile, for those of you who have a library of 35mm negatives and slides, take a close look at the Fotovix. It’s a reasonably priced and works as advertised. Too bad Tamron didn’t think of us Macintosh users when it designed the product — it wouldn’t have taken a photohound computer columnist to discover it.
Spy Makes Die Hard Photo History
The offending photo from Spy!
As Spy art director B. W. Honeycutt explains, Vanity Fair had embargoed all copies of the Demi Moore issue until it actually reached the newsstands, so that Spy was only four days away from its printing deadline when it became aware of the August Vanity Fair cover. The cover, however, represented a golden opportunity for parody by Spy, which aims to satirize society, politics, and celebrity attitudes–and which , coincidentally enough, was already planning to run a story in its September issue on Planet Hollywood, “the cheesy, Hard Rock rip-off restaurant that Bruce Willis, Sylvester Stallone, and Arnold Schwarzenegger are major investors in,” says Honeycutt.
Once the staff at Spy had decided that “impregnating” Willis was a must, Honeycutt set about finding appropriate “head shots” of Bruce Willis and, at the same time, a model whose body resembled Willis’ in terms of “the amount of chest hair and how much his arms were pumped up.” A photographer, Carolyn Jones, then took pictures of the model imitating the Demi Moore pose under identical lighting conditions.
For the computer wizardry, Honeycutt turned to FCL/Colorspace, a computer-based illustration, design, and retouching studio located, like the magazine itself, in New York City. FCL’s challenge lay in using its Quantel Graphic Paintbox system to convincingly merge the head shot of Willis with the model’s body but, more importantly, to manipulate the model’s stomach so as to achieve the proper degree of maternity.
Phil Heffernan, creative direction at FCL/Colorspace, made free use of his Paintbox airbrush took in order to bring about the desired transformation. In placing Willis’ head upon the model’s neck, he cut out unwanted pieces with the airbrush and then blended the remaining edges together. “The airbrush stencil,” says Heffernan, “let me cut things out with a really soft edge. That soft, transparent edge is what allows us to do a real subtle compositing of a person’s face or body or what have you.”
In order to create Willis’ pregnant stomach, Heffernan simply created a stencil over the model’s belly and stretched it out to the proper degree. The, using the airbrush–loaded with actual photographic material from the stomach–he filled in the rest of the belly, a process that involved bringing in ahri from the original belly and spreading it around.
According to Spy’s Honeycutt, the Paintbox’s ability tolet the user actually paint with the pixels of a photograph separates the Quantel system from other high-end computer retouching machines. “With the Paintbox, you can create images out of ‘whole cloth.’ But with a Scitex, for example, basically all you can do is cut, pick pieces out of photos, and put them together in a seamless way. Except for minor blending of edges, you can’t really create anything.”
Once FCL/Colorspace ahd submitted its first proof of the pregnant Willis to Spy, Honeycutt determined which spots needed some minor adjustments. While baically thrilled with FCL’s first pass, he believed that Willis’ stomach looked too much like a beer belly rather than like that of an expectant mother. Heffernan had little difficulty in going back to the Paintbox system and erasing and restretching the contours of the stomach to, in his words, “bring it closer in line to having a little baby inside of that belly rather than a whole lot of beer.” He also used the airbrush to accentuate the highlight that would appear on a very round stomach.
Honeycutt was very pleased with the final effect, now that Heffernan had succeeded in getting the stomach to look “more like a beach ball and lower.” He adds, “Getting the chiaroscuro [arrangement of light and shade] on the stomach so that it matches the light [of the Demi Moore image] was particularly wonderful.”
While he was at the task of improving the image, Heffernan also “broke” the model’s wrist to gain more curvature of the hand as it caressed the stomach. “the whole thing is about little details,” he says, “as most of these illusion projects are. Often if something is not done with as great an attention to detail, you look at it and sense that something is wrong. You can’t quite put your finger on what it is, but your eye notices it.”
Heffernan admits that FCL/Colorspace’s original investment in the $750,000 Graphic Paintbox was significant, but adds that it has allowed the studio to achieve “extreme believability and tremendous manipulation” on its projects.
The client, Spy magazine, has been more than pleased with the enthusiastic response of the public to its September cover–attention that has included coverage on the television programs “Entertainment Tonight” and “Good Morning, America.” Meanwhile, the publicity should also keep a beatific smile on Bruce Willis’ face.
Shutter Bug A Bad Disease In Morocco
Common sense says that a country founded on freedom (especially freedom of religion) with a Pledge of Allegiance that ends, with liberty and justice for all, and comprised of the wretched refuse of every country in the world, would foster a society tolerant of other people, their cultures, and their beliefs.
Not so. Apparently, Americans who go abroad still see themselves as the liberators of Europe. We expect to be treated with deference, simply because we are American, and we expect everyone we encounter to be able to speak English.
It’s true, the world is getting smaller. There are, however, a lot of languages out there, and many of them don’t resemble ours in the slightest. But we’re American. Everyone should want to speak our language. I hearken back to my military days.
Transformed
Within two weeks of my transfer to Morocco, other new arrivals and I were oriented to the culture of the country by a Navy officer. He informed us concerning the etiquette of the new society in which we would be living: what was polite, what was impolite, what was legal and what was not, and what the respective punishments were for doing something that was illegal.
Among other things, he informed us that certain of the more orthodox islamic sects believed that the camera was a tool of the devil; and, if a person’s face was ever caught on film, that individual was condemned. Just as the camera stole the image, so did it steal the soul.
A perennial shutterbug, I made a mental note of this – and discarded it. My superior education” told me that, whether they believed it or not, Moslems had nothing to fear from my camera. This was the audacity with which I set about documenting my two years in Morocco. I am a fortunate man, indeed, Not only did I escape Vietnam, I escaped the wrath of Islam.
On one of my first trips through the countryside, I came upon a village of a dozen huts constructed of mud and straw, the way they had been constructed for several thousand years. The area around the huts was dry and dusty. The area beyond was lush and green, with a stream running beside the open fields.
Kneeling at the edge of the stream, dressed in the full, flowing garb of their culture, was a group of women making use of the local Laundromat.
Stones in hand, they were pounding diligently on articles of clothing, which they then laid flat on the creek bank to dry. Believing my presence had gone unnoticed or unacknowledged, I affixed telephoto lens to my Pentax, raised it to my eyes, and clicked the shutter.
Experience had made me quick. I am sure it took no more than ten seconds to access my camera, change the lens, frame the photograph, and take it. But then, it’s possible to destroy a life in ten seconds or less.
one of the women had apparently looked up in time to see the camera at my face. She rose, rocks still in hand, and came running frantically toward me. And she screamed.
I cannot remember, before or since, ever hearing a scream so agonizing and desperate.
Other members of the village appeared, joining the woman at a dead run. Fortunately, I sat astride a piece of high-speed modern technology, and I quickly put the motorbike in gear and drove off.
I was immediately grateful for that piece of modem technology. I talked to it, thanked it, stroked its hindquarters.
It wasn’t until much later that I realized modern technology and my modern technology mentality had permitted me to steal a human soul and get away with it. It’s irrelevant that I knew better.” it’s cruel and arrogant that I considered my empirical knowledge superior to the Islamic woman’s faith.
Stolon Her Soul
In her mind, in her heart, and to the very depth of her being, she knew” I had stolen her soul, just as I knew” I had not. I had merely taken a picture. And I probably got a good night’s sleep that night.
But somewhere on the Moroccabn plain, I left an Islamic with her faith shattered, her mortal soul violated, and convinced she would never see her loved ones in the afterlife.
I wonder how she slept that night. I wonder if she ever slept again.
Twain said it best: “We despise all reverences and all the objects of reverence which are outside the pale of our own list of sacred things. And yet, with strange inconsistency, we are shocked when other people despise and defile the things which are holy to us.”