Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mark Rabiner wrote: > > Not just for the sake of argument but I'd like to disagree with some of our more > eminent members here and say that I think a sharp foreground is more important > than a sharp background although a sharp background is usually pretty easy to > get. I think your eye goes to the bottom of a picture after seeing the main > subject. A soft background we can forgive easier than a soft foreground. > Textures are bigger and right in front of you in the forground. I feel a little > sheepish saying this as am in general awe of the people who are saying pretty > much the opposite. I don't know where I get my ideas from. Maybe I made them up > and I am wrong. But I feel pretty strongly about them. > Mark Rabiner I agree with you Mark. If the foreground is interesting it must be sharp. If the foreground is not interesting then it's not likely to be an interesting photo. Dennis