[Leica] Shutterbug

[Irving Greines <igreines@GMSR.com>]

I read Sonny's comments.

I am quite familiar with Shutterbug--right up through the present date.  I
agree with Sonny that the magazine does have some qualities that others find
virtuous, including an advertising emphasis on used Leica gear.  Although
the ads are frequently outdated by the time of publication, they do provide
names of dealers who carry used Leica equipment.  The magazine also contains
other information that some might find helpful.  

As for the general quality of the images published in the magazine, I stand
by my comments.  It continues to by my view that many, many of the images
published are of "snapshot" quality, not worthy of publication in a national
magazine.  The current issue contains many images that fit that description.


As for the so-called "glamour" stuff, I agree that the current issue spares
us from some of the more unsightly stuff of the past, but one does not have
to go back too far to find it--you know what I mean, unattractive  models,
sitting on a rock in mundane poses with unattractive lighting. Plastic
images.  In my opinion (once again, I can only express my opinion, not
Sonny's or anyone else's), the magazine would do well if it hired an editor
with strong photographic sensibilities.  If Sonny and others like the
general flavor and quality of Shutterbug's images, then so be it--each to
his own.  

I'm puzzled by Sonny's last comment that I somehow need to show him my
images in order to be free to express my opinion about the general quality
of Shutterbug's photography.  I never knew that one had to be a photographer
in order to express an opinion about the quality of a photograph.  As for
me, I am a professional photographer, but I don't have a desire or find it
necessary to share my photos with Sonny or to have his approval in order to
express my opinion about the quality of Shutterbug's images.

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