Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/06/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Michael Gerard <geeman1066@earthlink.net> wrote: > No arguments here. That is the red light district and that is nice > bokeh. I can see you've practiced the speech you delivered to your > spouse regarding your presence in the red light district. I'm not > sure that words like "ambience," and phrases like "gritty urban > realism" actually distract women very much from the argument at hand. Michael, you may not believe this, but my wife was with me. We were between flights and had enough time to take the train into the city for a couple of hours. I wanted to take the tour of Ann Frank's attic hideout. My wife, who grew up near Babi Yar, didn't want to be thinking about the Holocaust on a ten-hour flight back to the west coast. She and was more interested in seeing the "District." So that's what we did. Because of the vigilant madam, I missed a great shot--a cute day care center, the front window filled with stuffed animals and colorful plastic blocks--located right next to one of the brothels. Talk about a symbiotic business relationship. . . Judging from other posts, I think people are taking my remarks about bokeh a little too seriously. It ain't bokeh--it's misfocused! I didn't dare look at my lens scale for fear that Madame Madam would see that I was taking a picture, and I ended up focusing too close by feel. I posted the picture because I was amused at Sander's photo, which was captioned "this is the red light district," but could have been taken anywhere in Amsterdam. My picture is terrible, but you can see where it is. If this were the Sixties, I would argue that the technical flaws enhance the clandestine nature of the photo, and the artistic sense of peeking at something forbidden. But since it isnt, I won't. - --Peter - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html