Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]- -----Original Message----- From: Peterson_Art@hq.navsea.navy.mil <Peterson_Art@hq.navsea.navy.mil> > A still photo therefore > may lend itself more easily to an artist's use of a situation to make > a statement of his or her choosing, whereas a motion picture (apart > from an artificial creation, like a commercial movie) may facilitate a > deeper, fuller, or more accurately understood reportage of an event. Art, I think you may underestimate the extent to which moving pictures, including those seen in television news, can be (and are) manipulated for greatest entertainment value and visual interest! I should know--I was part of that for years. Drama is heightened by zooming in or out, by camera motion, and by editing technique. The writer Ernest Callenbach, for one, has proposed dispensing with the whole quaint notion of "Journalistic Objectivity" and replacing it with one in which journalists make their biases known, then have at it, allowing their audience to form their own conclusions. My own favorite sources of info are international radio. That, and the Sunday New York Times. London's Times seems to have grown lighter and fluffier in recent years-a real shame. Jeff Segawa See my photography online at http://www.netone.com/~segawa