Re: [Leica] Alfie

["Jeffery L.Smith" <jls@runbox.com>]

I think one rub is that he asks for critiques but does not seem to take the 
suggestions into practice. Thus, folks are less willing to take the time to 
critique any more.

At 05:43 PM 9/6/02 -0500, you wrote:
>After reading BD's diatribe, I had to "see" what all the fuss was about - and
>also downloaded the "Postcards" pdf.
>
>Without a doubt, from any sort of professional POV, the writing, design and
>images need heavy duty editing and serious revision. The technical limits of
>the P&S digital camera, as well as the aesthetic and technical limitations of
>the shooter and designer, have certainly been revealed in the work. But in
>fairness a couple - few images have some appeal. And further, begin to speak
>about a potentially interesting existentialist theme (A philosophy that
>emphasizes the uniqueness and isolation of the individual experience in a
>hostile or indifferent universe, regards human existence as unexplainable, and
>stresses freedom of choice and responsibility for the consequences of one's
>acts.)
>
>I find it difficult to imagine this work coming from a graduate student; and
>its limitations being published for sale (self or otherwise). But as
>beginning, undergraduate student work; I see an idea, effort and direction
>buried in quantity, ego and verboseness. If indeed Alfie does not listen, see
>and learn, that's too bad. However, had Alfie submitted this body for
>critique, learned from that critique, and re-submitted a heavily edited
>revised version for further discussion - could we have found some compassion
>for his desire to communicate and learn?
>
>Indeed, can I depend on this group to help me in these regards? Or will I too
>get my head cut off?
>
>Within the last few days someone else submitted a body of work done with a
>digital P&S, much of it heavily manipulated in PS. I found it very strong
>visual work and appreciated the opportunity to see it. No one put it down for
>the hardware's technical limitations or the photographer's choice to use it.
>
>I don't understand why we put down effort without constructive criticism. To
>suggest that someone has erred in offering work to the LUG for viewing,
>critique and / or sale because it isn't up to "our standards" seems a slippery
>slope. I've spent a hell of a lot of time tracking down images submitted by
>members of this group which appear far worse than Alfie's best "postcards". In
>many cases I have no idea if the submissions come from beginners or from folks
>that have been trying for decades and really, maybe ought to give up the
>chase. And I don't know how long Alfie's been working at "it" either.
>
>Obviously Doug's wildlife work ranks magnitudes above Alfie's street work. And
>while Doug may not have ever offered "prints for sale" of his early attempts
>and failures as he pursued his craft. I don't think its inherently wrong or
>inappropriate on an FS-friday to do so. Don't like it - don't buy it. Don't
>like the guy / gal - don't read it or look at it. But why attack the person?
>What have I missed?
>
>geebeespawgeebeespaw@btopenworld.com
>(geebeespaw)9/6/029:13 PM
>
> >I never understood his obscure titling of his images and the photographs
>themselves did nothing for me but looking at the pdf file ("there's no such
>thing as bad publicity") I think they are an improvement on past efforts.
>Would I buy a copy? No I would not. Have I seen worse? Yes I have and not all
>of it mine and not all of it from amateurs. As previously stated, I will not
>be buying a copy but I would like to offer congratulations to Alfie for an
>object lesson in tenacity. He had a dream and he chased it down. It says
>something for the climate on the LUG >recently that I hesitate to post my
>opinion in case the fallout rains down on my head. If it does, so be it. Good
>on yer Alfie.
>
>George
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html