GRGR 1,2 oddments

[jporter]

On Nov 8, 2005, at 5:23 PM, David Casseres wrote:

> But I think that the dots in a newsprint photo are only called dots,
> never pixels.  I doubt that Pynchon knew the word pixel in 1973.
>


I think I remember hearing the term in the late sixties.
Anyhow "pixel" just turned 50:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4021/is_5_26/ai_n6080242


Nor does "pixel" seem exclusive to computer graphics:

	Pixels are generally thought of as the smallest complete
	sample of an image. The definition is highly context sensitive.
	For example, we can speak of pixels in a visible image (e.g.
	a printed page) or pixels carried by one or more electronic
	signal(s), or represented by one or more digital value(s), or
	pixels on a display device, or pixels in a digital camera (photo-
	sensor elements). This list is not exhaustive and depending
	on context there are several synonyms which are accurate in
	particular contexts, e.g. pel, sample, bytes, bits, dots, spots,
	superset, triad, stripe set, window, etc. We can also speak of
	pixels in the abstract, in particular when using pixels as a
	measure of resolution, e.g. 2400 pixels per inch or 640 pixels	per 
line. Dots is often used to mean pixels, especially by
	computer sales and marketing people, and gives rise to the
	abbreviation DPI or dots per inch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel


So it's completely possible that Pynchon was aware of the concept
and the term by 1973.  I haven't decided yet whether I'm going to stake
my life on it.

jody