Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/11/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I think a difference that makes no difference is not a difference. In substance, your objection might apply to the use of an image - i.e. a staged picture would not be a valid journalistic picture (although this would be a naive view of the matter, IMO) - but not what is going on between the corners of the frame. All you've got there is colours and tones, and the image has to stand or fall in terms of those alone. Of course, it might be gratifying to the photographer to think he had been lucky enough to get it just right without any direction at all, but this is not an internal property of the picture itself. A picture can never be the real thing, it is only a picture. - -- Rob http://www.robertappleby.com Mobile: (+39) 348 336 7990 Home: (+39) 0536 63001 All outgoing email scanned by Norton AntiVirus (TM) 2003 Professional Edition. - ----- Original Message ----- From: <robertmeier@usjet.net> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 4:51 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] re: The Decisive Moment is gone > It matters considerably whether a picture is an actual candid picture, or > one that has been staged to look like one. It is the difference between > reality and the representation, or imitation, of reality. It matters > whether a picture is the real thing, or not. > > One is the result of a photographer finding and capturing a moment of time > when all the elements of the picture have come together to form a > composition that has interest and life. The other is the result of a > director managing actors on a stage to produce a predetermined result. > Sometimes the results may look the same, but they are at opposite poles of > the universe in all other ways. > > Bob > > > > It does of course - because who is to know whether the person in the > picture > > is a stranger to you or not? See Helen Levitt's picture of her friend > being > > ogled by young men in Rome. It is completely immaterial whether the > picture > > was directed to some extent or not. Similarly, the hoohah over Doisneau's > > kiss photos is based on a mistaken premise, IMO. Or, to take an example > > closer to home, my own pictures are always taken with the subjects well > > aware of the fact that I present and taking pictures - often for days or > > weeks at a time. I think they show slices of life as well as any others, > if > > that is the criterion. All talk that concentrates on method rather than > the > > final result is missing the point, I think. Any method can only be judged > by > > how effective it is; it must be leapfrogged over to arrive at the picture. > > > > -- Rob > > -- > 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