Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hello Doug I apologize if my post implyed that photography as a hobby or pastime was second rate. I was trying to make the point that personal ideology plays a large role in photography for many and these persons should not be asked to take their discussion elsewhere. I often use photography for documentation purposes myself and there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. There is room on the LUG for all of us, although I am about 600 posts behind on my reading :) Regards Jim Hurtubise Doug Richardson wrote on Wed, Dec 2, 1998 : > Replying to a posting by "Gary D. Whalen" <whalen@whalentennis.com>, > Jim Hurtubise <jim@inap.com> commented that "For you maybe photography > is nothing but a hobby and pastime, but there are many > photojournalists and others on this list who want to make photographs > that have meaning and the power to move others emotionally." I hope he > ’s not implying that having photography has "a hobby and pastime" is > somehow second-rate. If he is, how are we to classify photographers > who use the camera simply as a recording instrument - a ‘photocopier’ > for the three-dimensional world? How about press photographers? > Wedding photographers? Or scientists who photograph atomic spectra, > starfields, or microscope specimens? Did the first-ever photo of the > planet Pluto have less significance for the human race than > "photographs that have meaning and the power to move others > emotionally"? > > -snip- >