[Leica] A new set of photos

[luisripoll at telefonica.net (Lluis Ripoll)]

Ted,

I had any problem with your message, always welcome!

Saludos cordiales
Lluis


El 15/09/2008, a las 6:33, Ted Grant escribi?:

> Ric Carter offered:
>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] A new set of photos
>
>>> I don't know about, Luis, but I'll tell you what I like about it.
>
>
>
> It's an Easter basket of faces with eyes all diverted from not only  
> the
> camera, but also each other. If one would like to wax artsy BS about  
> what
> that says about society in today's world, I suppose one could do  
> that. On
> first blush, I just find it a pleasant capture of the world.<<<<<
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Ric,
>
> Gee you sure read a lot into the exposure. It just didn't do  
> anything for me
> other than an exposure of faces. I suppose some folks read all kinds  
> of
> things into street photography. Unfortunately I don't!
>
> It's either there right in your face smack dab illustrating a fine  
> moment of
> a quick shooters ability. If that doesn't happen then usually the  
> shot is
> merely an exposure missed.
>
>
>
>>>> It has a wedge composition that I find pleasing. From one face on  
>>>> the
> right, it radiates toward the left, expanding into similar expressions
> pointed in differing directions.<<<
>
> Now that's quite an analysis. Some people can do this kind of thing  
> with
> almost any exposure. I'm always amazed at what the "Art Crowd  
> people" read
> into some of my medical photographs in the published books.
>
> I "see eyes" of the nurse, that's it period. "Art person" can go  
> into a
> description of the design and composition of the photograph way  
> beyond what
> the triggering photo moment was, "The eyes!" But then they never  
> mention
> that aspect because they don't see as a photojournalist of people.   
> But they
> sure as heck can do as you've done with a mega analysis.
>
>
>
>>>> Why is Luis's expression of appreciation without explanation less  
>>>> valid
> than a condemnation without explanation?<<<<
>
> I merely asked him what he saw that he liked. You're the one going  
> into all
> the details. I didn't condemn the shot, it just didn't do anything  
> for me
> compared to many of the others. So I was curious to find out what he  
> liked
> and made his comment. Quite simple really.
>
>
>
>>> "I like" is a matter of personal taste. If you are prepared to  
>>> argue  "No,
> you don't," help yourself, but you cannot win that one.<<<
>
> I don't have a problem with anyone making a comment "I like it."  
> However I
> see absolutely nothing wrong with asking the question.. "What is it  
> that you
> like?" You might consider I was trying to learn something by his  
> comment.
> Quite simple again and non-condemning.
>
>
>
>>>>> Sometimes, folks don't have time to explain why they like a  
>>>>> particular
> photo. Sometimes, they don't even know. Knowing that someone  
> appreciates the
> image is still a reinforcement and at least a bit educational to the
> photographer.<<<<<
>
> You are right most people don't go into a great diatribe explanation  
> of why
> or why not about pictures. And what did I just say? I was trying to  
> learn
> something and you haven't given me credit that may have been the case.
>
>
>
>>>>> Clearly, you did not care for the collection. That's fine. It  
>>>>> says as
> much about your taste as John's photos. Luis's comments say the  
> same.<<<<
>
> No I didn't say I didn't care for the collection, the over all  
> series is
> very well done and I'm giving John credit as a fine street shooter  
> as we've
> seen in the past on many occasions. My comment and I still stand on  
> it. I
> think he needed to be a touch more ruthless in his edit. Hey, we all  
> are our
> own worse editors! You may not think so, that's your privilege.
>
>
>
>>>> Could the collection have been more strictly edited. Of course.  
>>>> But, then
> I may have missed some of the ones I like best.<<<
>
> Once again your prerogative. But this conversation is hardly worth  
> noting in
> the reality of editing. Again here is my earlier comment in answer  
> to Luis
> "I like" remark.
>
>
>
> On Sep 14, 2008, at 5:52 PM, Ted Grant wrote:
>
>> Why? I feel there are several others far superior to this >which  
>> didn't do
> a thing for me. So mon ami, why do you like this one and what does  
> it have.
> That makes you like it?<<<
>
>
>
> See Ric, all I did was ask a simple question in that maybe I'd learn
> something from a fellow photographer. Better luck next time.
>
> Cheers,
>
> ted
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information