Re: [Leica] Powerful image

["Bryan Willman" <bryanwi@seanet.com>]

Another theory is that a powerful image
can sumarize and frame some large
and difficult issue.

Powerful issues are of war, famine,
poverty, disease.etc.  Their power is
that they make us see what actually
happened, help make us believe it
is real, help us understand how bad
it really was/is/will be.

I think you can have powerful images
of good things, but it is harder.  Maybe
because we already all believe that
it's nice to be in love, that good health
is a blessing, etc.

Some powerful images are very
spectacular because of timing
(the hiddenberg burning in air,
 a man falling after being shot
 in spain, D-day)  Interestingly,
Lecias and similar cameras
are prominent for this.  The key
thing (which a Lecia does well)
is to be there in the hand of
the observer and ready to
go Right Now.

bmw



- -----Original Message-----
From: Paul Chefurka <pchefurk@Newbridge.COM>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Powerful image


>Alan Hull wrote:
> 
>> I can understand a spectacular picture, (when you say WOW).  But what
>> on earth is a powerful one?
>
>I don't know if this will make sense, but I'll give it my best shot.
>
>A spectacular picture creates a reaction that is somehow "external"
>to the viewer, while a powerful picture creates a reaction that is
>internal.
>
>Or,
>
>A spectacular picture depends on physical response for its effect
>(contrasts, textures, forms, lines, colours, etc.), while a
>powerful picture depends on an emotional, philosophical or
>spiritual response.
>
>Or,
>
>A spectacular picture speaks to substance, a powerful picture
>speaks to meaning.
>
>This is why you see so many spectacular advertising photos,
>but so few powerful ones.  Or, to be just a bit confrontational,
>photographers with little to say can create spectacular pictures
>by the manipulation of perspective, lighting, composition etc,
>but they create powerful ones only by accident, because these
>photographs depend on some communication from behind the lens
>as well as from in front of it.
>
>Paul Chefurka
>