RE: [Leica] RE: Street Photography debate

[Jem Kime <jem.kime@cwcom.net>]

Dan,
I think think follows on from my tirade against judges.

There is a feeling in club or salon photography that there are 
quasi-mystical rights and wrongs to making a photograph 'work', or 'be 
right'. Providing the caveats you explained are there (and even sometimes 
if they're not!) the expression of an artistic nature should never succomb 
to almost scientific 'rules of composition'.
There is a well written critique of a Rembrandt portrait, delivered in the 
style of a club/salon photography judge (I'm sorry I can't place it now) 
wherein the painting is demolished for lack of contrast, sharpness, 
breaking the golden rectangle/rule of thirds/'S' shaped composition etc, 
and lack of shadow detail! It's delightful.
If photographers wish to take pictures to be admired by their peers in 
their enclosed photographic environment, then fine, that's all they have to 
worry about, following the dictates of those who have gone before..
If, however, they wish to be their own person and describe the world as 
they see it themselves, then they need to ignore the 'rules' and pursue 
their own personal vision.

Jem
- -----Original Message-----
From:	D Khong [SMTP:dkhong@pacific.net.sg]
During a recent discussion with a friend who takes mainly salon style
photography, he said that street photography is not artistic photography
because it breaks too many rules of composition, etc.

I said that as long as street photography captures the essence of life and 
the heartbeat
of the environment, it is an artform in itself.

Any comments?

Dan K.