While the essay was exhaustive in its description of the camera's limitations, the eye/brain's single most important photography-related limitation (IMHO) was given scant coverage. Namely, binocular vision. Peter
I covered binocular versus monocular vision in my "Seeing" essay, part of my previous series: "Aesthetics & Photography." I did not include it in this new essay to avoid redundancy. I also focused in this new essay on technical aspects that can be corrected rather than on Seeing and composing, of which I think binocular versus monocular vision is part of.
Regarding reality versus my vision of reality, and in regards to Kaelaria's post, I make no secret that my goal is to express my emotions and not represent reality "as it is". Reality varies from one person to the next and there is no one way to represent it "as it is" anyway.
Removing camera defects and expressing one's vision and emotions are compatible actions that do not negate each other. My goal is to create images that represent my emotional response to the scenes I photograph and that are free of camera defects.
Two days of work on an image is actually not very long. I regulary work on images for much longer. We must keep in mind that these are spans of time, not actual hours. In other words, I did not work 48 straight hours on the image in question. Rather, and in this instance (Spiderock in Snowstorm) I spent two days considering the many possible options offered to me, performing the necessary optimizations, printing the image and making additional corrections. Because I work towards representing an emotion the process sometimes takes weeks or months as I work my way towards a finer and finer version of what I have in mind. For me, this is, by nature, a slow process. My goal is quality, not quantity, and therefore I see it as an advantage rather than an impediment.
I will be focusing on the creative aspects of my approach in my next essays which are about Inspiration, Creativity and Vision.