define: teach

I got my Univ results last saturday. I got a CGPA (Cumulative Grade Point Average) of 6.85. Since it’s my S12 results, there’s isn’t anything cumulative about it… yet. Here’s Google definition search for CGPA, in case you don’t know what it is. Anyway, you might think that I’m not happy about it, but if you know me even a little bit, you’d realise that a high score has never been too high (am I repeating words?) on my priority list.

You see, I just want to get along. I find some subjects quite interesting, while others… well, I’m indifferent towards them. I mean, I know they’re not really horrible or anything, but I definitely can’t remember ever seeing them in an interesting light. Last year it was Electrical Engineering and even Mathematics… towards the end of the semester, anyway. This year, the trend has continued and I have no love for either Maths or Electronics. I have this… hypothesis, that it has all to do with the teacher. The more disinterested the teacher is about the ‘teaching’. The more disinterested I become. For example, we used to have this one Mr. Bobby Philip teach us ‘Circuits and Instrumentation’ this year until a few weeks ago. He’s got to be one of the most… indifferent… teachers ever. He never asks his students for any feedback… well, maybe he does once in a while, but in the time it takes for the unfortunate few who slumber in the front benches to awake from their stupor, he’d have moved on to answering the question himself, or better yet, to scribbling something on the board with his back to the class. It’s not that he’s a bad chap or anything… he’s just bloody boring, and he doesn’t seem to give a shit that he is.

It just WON’T DO people! Teachers, if you’re reading this… disinterest in your students is probably the ultimate interest killer, and quite possibly results-dampener when that time of the year comes around. The worst bit is that it can quite effectively kill interest in the subject in the minds of the students and when that happens, it’s bloody hard to fix.

I’m not a teacher, no, but you don’t really need an IQ of 150 to figure out what I’m saying. And I’m not wrong… at least I don’t think I am. I haven’t introduced any revolutionary new ideas in this short rant of mine, they just happen to be obvious things that somehow or the other are forgotten by the people who are suppposed to teach others. What I’m sad of is that a lot of these teachers actually know that their students wouldn’t give a rat’s ass to actually listen to what they rant on in class. Truly, my only incentive for sitting in Mr. Bobby’s class were those little ticks in the attendance register that will let me sit for my final exam.

I don’t open any books at home. I just don’t. There’s no interest, no incentive. The possibility that it might just (and it probably would) get me some 10 percent more in the exams is simply not attractive. That’s where the problem lies, and that’s probably it for the scores of other guys (and girls though I don’t exactly know any) I know who score low, not because they don’t have the brains or anything… their only explanation being that they just didn’t study much before the exams.

I gotta run now. Talk to you all, later. lol.

Letter to the Editor

Hello,

I recently purchased the October 2006 issue of “Better Photography”, and it being my first experience with your magazine, I thought I’d point out some things that were somewhat (and more) ‘off’, in my opinion. First of all it has to do with your editorial in which you say that “6MP is now passe”, and that “what was seen as a more than decent sensor is now relegated to the humdrum”. I’m not an expert, but from what I’ve gathered from months of digging around online forums after a bout (continuing) of photography craze, something that I’m quite sure of is that mega pixels are close to the least important parameters to look at when purchasing a camera these days. Let’s consider the Nikon D50 which, with it’s 6MP sensor will, under most circumstances (right lens, right light, right person etc etc) will provide a much ‘better’ photo than, say, a 10MP Sony Cybershot DSC-N2. Okay, I’m comparing wildly across class here, but the point is that the main use of mega pixels is to allow an increase in print size, and perhaps for more comfortable cropping. From what I’ve read innumerable times in various forums, even a 4MP camera is more than enough for ‘photo-quality’ A4 size prints, so more mega pixels just for it’s own sake, is of no purpose.

You also say: “I am not referring to the sensor size at all, but just the mega pixels it can hold.” Why aren’t you?! It’s well known (another something I’ve picked up from those forums ) that cramming more mega pixels onto an already small sensor has NEVER helped matters as far as ISO-induced noise is concerned. I could once again use the example of the Nikon D50 and the N2 in this case. The D50, with it’s APS-C sized sensor will quite simply wipe the floor with the N2 (with it’s diminutive sensor) when comparing photos at anything higher than 200 ISO. While it is true that noise issues are becoming less of a problem with newer generations of fixed-lens (particularly Fuji’s) cameras, it’s still nowhere near as good as a D-SLR’s performance.

I also saw this bias towards mega pixels in your ‘BP Digital Camera Directory’, where camera’s are actually categorized according to the amount of mega pixels that they have. It’s lead to some truly absurd combinations like the ‘< 6MP’ D-SLR category where the Professional Nikon D2H is seen camping with Entry-level Nikon D50 and the Pentax *ist DL, and in the ‘> 6MP’ category with the Olympus E-500 (which I’m a proud owner of) grouped with the likes of the 1D Mark II and the D2X. Categorizing D-SLRs by MP count?!? That’s nothing short of utter Idiocy!

There’s also the issue of the rating system in the Product list. From what I can see, more than half the cameras you’ve reviewed are in the 76% – 82% range. 76% also happens to be the lowest rating given to a camera. What’s the deal here? I really think a grade system along the line of A+, A, B+ etc. would make more sense here, since the worth of a camera lies mostly in individual user experience.

On page 50, you’ve answered a Mr. Sudhir Sahu’s question about the MP800, telling him that it can neither print from 35mm film, nor not print without a PC. Good god!! Where did you get that information from?! And how could you even suggest it?? The MP800 is the flagship (or pretty close to it) model in Canon’s multifunctional printer lineup, and given the fact that even mid-range MFD-s can perform those operations, it makes no sense to me that you’d even think of it. When you even went to the length of getting a good picture of the printer, you really could have considered reading SOMETHING about it before rendering ‘advice’ about it. The curious coincidence that I own an MP800 (and having printed from a 35mm film without a PC, though not at passport size) myself might explain the sudden jolt of indignation I felt when I read your reply. I’ve pasted a link to Canon India’s ’short’ list of features of the MP800.

http://site-in.canon-asia.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=allinone&prod_type=mp800

As you’ll see if you click the link, it’s pretty short.

I’m really sorry, but I’ve one more complaint to add. In your review of the Sony Alpha 100 which, though comprehensive in most aspects, says absolutely nothing about ‘ISO – Noise’ performance of the camera and since ISO performance is one of the most important parameters to consider, especially when buying into a D-SLR system, the lack of such is quite saddening.

Ok, I’m done bashing. The magazine IS really good. I love most of the content, and I find the contests pretty interesting. The article ‘All about Colour’ was also pretty neat. It’s just that these few things really annoyed me, and I hope I haven’t hurt anyone’s feelings by pointing them out. Now that I’ve written such a lot, I really hope that it gets read by someone. I don’t even want to think of the situation where it’ll get forgotten in digital oblivion.

Keep up the good work.

Hari Gopal.