Interpreta- 
ap was at a 
to compile 
PI man. A 
'rammetrist 
ssistance to 
ns and ob- 
ian and he 
. methods". 
e end result 
the Photo 
f the final 
>» time and 
and under 
| money to 
ermine the 
n", or the 
/l densities, 
may be all 
trist, trans- 
f accuracy, 
strived for. 
t that will 
curacy; an 
' to set-up, 
ion for its 
out I think 
the Photo 
wn stereo- 
asuring in- 
rpreter. 
cally, opti- 
Interpreter 
There are 
t factor — 
isuring the 
h your ar- 
Oo within a 
' make the 
je measure- 
of fields ot 
should be 
r a reef at 
ding oper- 
  
   
    
  
   
   
  
   
  
  
   
  
  
  
  
   
   
   
   
  
  
  
  
   
  
   
   
  
   
    
  
    
   
  
  
   
  
   
  
   
  
    
    
    
     
(727) 
In summary, then, the Photo Interpreter and the Photogrammetrist should 
have a general working knowledge and understanding of each other's tech- 
niques, objectives and problems. The Photogrammetrist should understand that 
there are times when *horseback methods" will work, and that there is a need 
for instruments that will give approximate results; similarly the Photo Inter- 
preter should know that there are times when the desired accuracy may be 
beyond his capabilities, in which case he should call on the Photogrammetrist 
for assistance. Working together in this way I think each can profit. 
SEMANTICS AND PHOTOGRAMMETRY !) 
by 
Amrom H. Katz. 
I must apologize to all you weary people who have been subjected to the 
intense acoutical bombardment of the past two weeks and who must listen to 
yet one more speaker. That this is the last paper to be given before the great 
1952 meeting of the International Society of Photogrammetry is both obvious 
and comforting. What will not be obvious for at least another few minutes is 
that this is the latest paper — it was written, finished, typed, and cleared within 
the last 48 hours. 
Now this does not mean that I have a brand new invention to announce. 
I have no new invention, no startling development, no discovery, not even a 
new formula to show you. By now you should have seen and heard enough of 
both the new and old in these categories. 
"The problem area I will discuss with you this morning is the realm of 
ideas and communication. I have a few thoughts, or perhaps I should say, a few 
preliminary notions to lay before you. Many or most of you will find little 
that is new here, and nothing that is revolutionary. Fortunately, for me, no 
one has listed such prerequisites to my talking to you here today. 
For a long time I have felt that some of the major problems in the fields 
of photogrammetry, mapping and charting arise because of lack of under- 
standing and appreciation of the other fellow's viewpoints and needs. Further, 
Pm convinced that these problems are caused by lack of agreement on the 
meanings of simple words and the ideas behind them. 
As a starter, let me make an incomplete list of a few words: ?) require- 
ments, economical, cost, value, suitability, practical, performance. Y could have 
added two more — precision and accuracy — but I hope the panel discussion 
in the June 1952 issue of Photogrammetric Engineering has taken care of these 
two words. 
I hasten to add that I am not suggesting a separate panel discussion of 
every word in the above list. But we all recognize that these words appear, are 
used, and are not subject to the same interpretation in many discussions that 
occur between say, specification writer and manufacturer, between people in 
1) Presented at Washington meeting of the International Societv of Photogrammetry, 
16 September 1952. Cleared for publication by the Office of Public Information, Department 
of Defense. 
2) Panel discussion “On the Reliability of Measured Values” Photogrammetric Engineering 
Vol. XVIII, No. 3, pp 536-574, June, 1952.