Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ted Grant wrote: >here is an example of impact by both mediums of exactly the >same incident. >We have a still photo by Eddie Adams mentioned earlier of the >VC being shot in the head and that there was also a TV crew >taping the same thing. [...] >We all remember Eddie's picture. A still captured moment! >Who'll forget it. >But how many of you remember the TV intimacy "motion image", >not just of the shooting, but the moments after, tape rolling >as the man lay there dying with blood pumping 18 inches into >the air out the hole in the skull? >Oh you don't remember that intimate moment with emotional impact? Ted, B.D. Colen and I have been exchanging comments, and we also discussed the still vs. film version of the VC execution. My contention is that this is not a fair comparison, because it was an incident that played to the strengths of still photography and not to the strengths of film. I suggest that it would be equivalent to make the argument that film is a more powerful medium, by taking a great piece of filmmaking, pulling a still from the film, and arguing that film is better because the still lacks the impact of the film... Both media have their strengths and weaknesses. The critical thing is to understand the potentials and limitations of the medium that *you* work with. Of course, anyone who's seen your work can attest that you do. Best regards, Alexey .......................................................................... Alexey Merz | URL: http://www.webcom.com/alexey | email: alexey@webcom.com