Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Joe, While I definitely agree that this list is in great need of more discussion of technique, who the heck are you to declare that anyone's family photos do not "justify the expense"? There are many of us for whom those "snapshots" are more beautiful or important than any other work of photography that has heretofore been created!!!! I have photos of my family taken with expensive equipment, Leica or otherwise, that could not have been taken with other equipment -- do you suggest those memories of my children growing up are a waste of the equipment as compared to the possibility that those lenses may have been used by another to make a published image that paid the photographer's rent one month and will be tossed out when the next week's issue of Time arrives? That photo of the INS grabbing Elian will probably win a Pulitzer, but I doubt Ken Lisaka would trade his Noctilux shots of his child's birth for it! Tom Schofield - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Codispoti" <joecodi@thegrid.net> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 3:17 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] it DOESN'T work well for leica! > Duane and Pascal, > > Speaking for myself, I am simply saying that the amateur photos taken by > amateur LUG photographers could have been taken with any camera with any > lens. I am not being critical of the snapshots , merely of the amount of > money spent to take those snapshots. > Obviously if those individuals can afford the high speed lenses, more power > to them, but the fact remains that they are not being used in a way that > would justify the expense. > * * * > > Joseph Codispoti >