"unsourced acronyms"? Those must be UAs, right? :-)
Chuck Norcutt
Ken Norton wrote:
> Raw Wilcox wrote:
>
>> Seriously, I think it didn't seem like a serious term in the first
>> phases. All caps made it seem technical rather than slang. Just a
>> guess.
>>
>
>
> A quick look over the Internet revealed an almost equal reference to RAW,
> Raw and raw. It seems to make a difference whether or not it is used as an
> adjective or as an object within the sentence.
>
> For example: "The camera was set to save in a raw file format." The word
> "raw" is an adjective.
>
> But sometimes it can be used as a technical setting: "The camera's quality
> setting was set to RAW".
>
> A hybrid version of this is: "The camera was set to save Raw Files". "Raw
> Files" denotes a specific type of file you are looking for when you are
> downloading them from the camera into your computer.
>
> Personally, I prefer RAW, because it is an unsourced acronym that places it
> on equal footing within the written sentence as JPEG and TIFF which reduces
> confusion. When writing about raw files in the generic sense, I may use
> "raw", but when I write about specific raw files I'll use "RAW". Example:
> "I have my E-1 set to save both RAW and JPEG."
>
> I have no problem with unsourced acronyms. They happen, just as recursive
> acronyms happen.
>
> AG (or is it ag?) Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|