Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/03

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Puts
From: "M.E.Berube" <MEB@goodphotos.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2000 15:24:42 -0500
References: <3A02FE8E.40B366D9@earthlink.net> <40.2e1893e.27345561@aol.com>

Photography may be considered under two denominations: Artistic and Scientific.

The Artistic adherent proposes that that equipment which renders likeable 
results is acceptable to use.

The Scientific proponent professes that the properties of any peice of 
equipment used under a controlled environment dictate the quality of 
results that that tool may yield.

Many of the Artistic camp seek to make use of the learned advice that is 
issued from the Scientific camp in lieu of (and often in conjunction with) 
experience in an effort to replicate optimum results from any given piece 
of equipment in a largely uncontrolled environment (the real world.)

Still others in the Artistic camp believe as Mr. Gandy does when he says on 
his site (http://www.cameraquest.com):

"During the 50's the likes of Eugene Smith, Cartier-Bresson, David Douglas 
Duncan, Capa, and Eisenstadt set the standard for candid Leica photography 
with lenses often seen today as old and substandard. Yet, today's 
photography certainly is no better, and is very seldom as good."

Ladies and Gentlemen, I submit to you that the art and science of 
Photography is large enough for us all to seek our personal vision as we 
best see fit. It is not necessary that we all agree on how we do that.

Carpe Luminem,
Michael E. Berube
http://www.goodphotos.com

In reply to: Message from "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> ([Leica] Something really important and on topic for a change....)
Message from Krechtz@aol.com (Re: [Leica] Lifespan of Digital Print (previously XTOLtimes/dilutions WAS Dev...)