Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I don't think there's any corruption going on either by the photographer or the competition. They're simply taking a "rule" to its ridiculous extreme; without using common sense or knowledge of the the history of the craft; not to mention the art. The rule intends to eliminate intentional, significant visual lies and fraud. In its wake we lose the reasonable, ethical use of the current tools of our craft. To pose the question in this case seems reasonable. "Does this photograph step over the line of journalistic or documentary ethics?" The decision of "yes" seems to me unreasonable. At a simpler, superficial level: "does this photograph break our silly rule?" okay "yes." case closed. Sad - because the "finished" photograph worked - full of feeling, strong and relevant. Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist On Mar 5, 2010, at 3:23 PM, Steve Barbour wrote: > it may be that the corruption lies in the competition, not the > photograph.