Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/05/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Go Sonny! Get that name! ;-) (Great exchange below, btw...) B. D. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of (SonC) Sonny Carter Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2002 2:46 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] Another 'does anybody (year of) "Year of Living Dangerously," probably my favorite film of all time. I'll look into it, until I find out, here's a memorable set of lines from the film: PETE Condon, Condon, Condon. I'm talking elegance, all you ever shoot are tits. Why don't you quit trying to sell us the pursuit of abstract beauty and admit you're a pervert? KEVIN Come on Billy, you're a professional, is that pornography or art? BILLY If it's in focus, it's pornography, if it's out of focus, it's art. WALLY Definitely art. They really are exquisite Regards, Sonny - ----- Original Message ----- From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2002 1:01 PM Subject: [Leica] Another 'does anybody know...' > Does anyone know who shot the stills that featured so prominently in > fantastic movie, The Year of Living Dangerously (which was on here last > night on some weird channel) - Mel Gibson, Sigourney Weaver, ? Hunt (who won > an Oscar for best supporting actress for her role as "Billy," the male dwarf > photographer). Some really strong black and white stuff supposedly shot by > "Billy." > > Anyone? > > B. D. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of B. D. Colen > Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 2:56 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: RE: [Leica] Photoshop dilemma > > > What point am I missing - of course one should not pass off the third image > as a "photograph:" It is a photo illustration, a photo montage - but it > should not be called a photograph. If it is called a photograph and accepted > as such by people who know what was done to it, then photographs lose all > meaning as portrayals of an instant of reality. Whatever reality may be. > > Nice job though, Sonny! ;-) > > B. D. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of geebeespaw > Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 2:45 PM > To: LUG > Subject: [Leica] Photoshop dilemma > > > When is a photograph not a photograph? > > http://www.geebeephoto.com/html/photoshop_1.html > > > Graham > http://geebeephoto.com > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html