Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/04/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]BD wrote (don't you just love arguing with that guy?!): >>>> How about the fact that photographs are generally thought to be accurate representations of reality - paintings, with rare exception, are not. Photos are thought to show us what IS in a given instant; paintings show us what was in the mind of the artist. And so on. I am not arguing that photos tell the truth, or that there are not photos that are representations of what is on/in the mind of the photographer. All I am saying is that it is very easy to understand why people apply a "higher" standard to photographs. >>>> Well, if I'm taking a picture, say, of a man chopping up some bones in an abattoir and I keep saying to some fool in the background "would you please please _please_ not keep looking round the edge of that door at me like that please" and the said fool _keeps on_ looking round the edge of the door like that, _and_ (this is the technical part!) the background in the door is nice and black, then you can be sure I'm just going to photoshop his ass right out of the picture when I get home. No ethical problem there. On the other hand, I'm not about to make it look like he's GWB and he's chopping off my mate Ossama's head on the block. That would be naughty, very naughty. - -- Rob http://www.robertappleby.com Mobile: (+39) 348 336 7990 Tel: (+39) 059 303436 See City of Crows online at The Digital Journalist: http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0204/city_intro.htm - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html