Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>>>>> On 27 Oct 2000, Alan Hull wrote, at least in part: > To say that a black and white still foto is complete and needs no > support is a remarkable example of wishful thinking. We live in a > three dimensional world of colour and movement and smell etc. > (Martin Howard). The viewer of a foto supplies the majority of > the missing info. I'll leave the decision as to whose view is more correct to the readers, Alan. Bear in mind, though, that every still photo doesn't succeed just as not every film clip succeeds! Would a film clip of the same episode necessarily have given enough detail for your wife and her friend to have better understood the venue etc.? How inportant is it for the viewer, in the case of this photo, to know the venue and exact situation? Will you be happier if I say that a still photo *can* be complete unto itself, and that a film clip *may* have extra detail that promotes understanding and appreciation? We're at loggerheads if you won't grant that. - - -- Roger, List-Owner The LEG (Leica Enthusiasts Mailing List) <<<<<< I remember reading where Cornell Capa said they took his brother's picture of the spanish civil war shooting to Japan, thinking it was a picture with absolutely universal significance and they just didn't get it. How would Winogrand's picture of the bear biting his cage go down in Saudi Arabia, or a Mapplethorpe fistf..k? (Note the tactful excision of offending u and offending c). I think everything about a still picture is context and culture dependent. So there. Please, Roger, let's be at loggerheads! No? Oh alright then.... Rob.