[Leica] re: alfie's paw & bd's comments

[Kyle Cassidy <KCassidy@asc.upenn.edu>]

lea said, of b.d.'s comment below:

<<Alfie, you have to give much, much more thought to what you shoot - at
least you do if you are planning to post the images>>

>If I have any complaints about the PAW it is summed up in this extraction
>from B.D.'s post to Alfie regarding his post for the week.
>
>First of all, Alfie can post whatever the hell he wants. And who is B.D. to
>say Alfie didn't give a heck of a lot of thought to this image even before

[snip]

>I am appalled.

imho, if we're posting publically we should expect public comments. and i
hope this isn't a pat-on-the-back club. i certianly hope that if i post a
lousy photo that b.d. will waste no time pointing that out (which he has, in
fact, done on several occasions, most notably a couple of years ago when i
decided i wanted to do a gallery show about women who cut themselves). if i
can count on b.d. to tell me when my pictures are terrible, i know that if
he says that one is good,  i can believe it.

i, myself, would like to believe that anybody with a two thousand dollar
camera has advanced to the level where they can take a decent photo and know
why they did. if alfie wants to step in and say he's influenced by
eggelstein or to him the photo evokes the ghosts of lost reality, that's
what we're all here for.

b.d. may be a harsh critic, but he's speaking his honest mind. i, myself,
don't see anything outrageous about his comments. the photo in question 

 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=468422

leaves me, personally, wondering what the photographer was thinking. i think
his crit was not mean spirited, but entirely appropriate. being an artist
who exhibits publically necessitates some type of thicker skin than normal.
you listen to the criticism, take what you think is valuable, and ignore the
rest.

just my .02, take it for what it's worth.

kc
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html