Re: [Leica] The perception of photographic quality

["Joe Stephenson" <joeleica@flash.net>]

Jim,
You are quite correct. It is all too easy to find people displaying (and
selling?) what can only be described--as you say--as bad. It is rather
depressing. However, what is really scary is that you are just seeing one
especially annoying example of the decline of taste and knowledge. Take
virtually any example from film to home design to radio or tv, to what have
you. The result is the same; lots of visually unfortunate and unsatisfying
glop. But, I admit, is is annoying and shocking to have someone regard a bad
photograph, and then hear them wax on about its beauty.
In wonder,
Joe Stephenson


- -----Original Message-----
From: Jim Brick <jimbrick@photoaccess.com>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Tuesday, February 23, 1999 6:51 PM
Subject: [Leica] The perception of photographic quality


>It is amazing to me. Every time I look at photographs, along with members
>of the non-photographic public, I am appalled at what they will accept.
>
>They haven't a clue what "dynamic range" is. They don't know that black is
>supposed to be black. And highlights should have detail. Low contrast color
>photos or extreme contrast color photos don't seem to get even a query.
>
>Last year, at an "Embedded Controller" trade show, the "SUN Microsystems"
>corporation was showing a scanner/copier that utilized SUN's Alpha chip.
>They were scanning an 8x10 color photograph. I picked up one of the
>"copies" and nearly puked. I then opened the lid and retrieved the
>original. My wife and I looked at it, and reached for our barf bags.
>
>The photograph was of a one or two million dollar mansion with a Rolls
>parked out front. It was on a "bright" sunny crystal clear day. The house
>was in direct sunlight and the Rolls was in deep shadow. This was a
>straight color print made from a transparency so I believe you can see, in
>your mind, what it looked like. Blown out highlights on the building front,
>and an almost unrecognizable automobile in the muck of the shadow. This was
>the epitome of a horrible photograph. You can also imagine what the copy
>looked like.
>
>The SUN staff member that was fielding questions about their boards, chips,
>etc, walked up. I said to him, "why don't you get a good photograph, one
>that will show off your ware."
>
>And his response was, as he took the 8x10 from my hand, "why... what's
>wrong with this photograph? !!!"
>
>I said nothing. Just swallowed, and walked off.
>
>Good grief!
>
>This area of California has a proliferation of "Art & Wine Festivals",
>"Fine Art in the Park", etc... There are usually between six and ten
>photography "gallery" booths in these fairs. One is always "exceptionally"
>good. John Gavrillis. Uses a 4x5 Linhof Master Technika. Also has an R7 and
>some R lenses. I've purchased some of John's work. It is absolutely
>outstanding. John makes his living by photographing the US landscape and
>selling framed Cibachrome prints. From 8x10 to 30x40. He has also published
>a book of his photography, sold through private sales only. John is also
>providing LightJet 5000 prints now, as well.
>
>Having said that, there may be one other "good" photographic booth at these
>fairs, but the rest are dismal! It is unbelievable to me what some people
>call good and "saleable" photography. B&W and color. Yuck! But as you stand
>there and watch, they sell tons of this stuff. To the public at large.
>
>Good grief again!
>
>It's as if those qualities that we all strive for, sweat over, argue over,
>and buy Leica equipment for, are wasted on us.
>
>Jim
>