Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/08/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]James: There's nothing wrong with my vision. A young woman wins a number of prestigious international prizes for photography. I've never seen her work before. I approach her work and try to understand her vision. I read her statement(s) of purpose and try to understand what she is communicating. I give her power by assuming that she has approved presentation of her work on the two sites that I was pointed to, Leica's and www.in-public.com, and take it for what it is. I don't try to fit it into what you call my "cynical personal vision". I don't try to compensate for my pathetically closed mind by trying to troubleshoot her monitor settings - (or assume her meters not working for God's sake). But your so right Jim - she's sitting on the beach, saying to herself, "Damn, if I'd only got my settings right, my pictures would look like everyone else's.) So too dark. Yes, and Picasso's Blue Period was too blue. While we're at it, Gene Smith could have lightened up the back ground in "Mad Eyes" so we can see what else is going on. Perhaps the fact that they don't follow your precious under any "normal photographic standards" is the reason she's gathering up the prizes. I think she's very talented. What's cynical about that? But hey, you've definitely got the beginnings of an aesthetic there. Look at a photo. Second guess at everything that could be changed until it resembles what you think a photo should look like, then wonder why it got a prize. If that's too abrasive, you've been watching too much TV news. BTW I work in a cross-platform shop, and I don't understand why you are jumping to silly defensive conclusions about Macs? Stuart Phillips - -----Original Message----- From: Jim Hemenway [mailto:jim@hemenway.com] Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 8:51 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] WOW! Stuart: You can get off of your pulpit. No one was condescending, it's just your cynical personal vision of people's intentions. I have Macs and prefer them and simply mentioned that it's possible that she forgot to adjust the photos on her website for the larger PC community... that's if she had created it on a Mac. Several people said that they were too dark, not just "a couple." Go LOOK AT HER WEBSITE, not the great beach shots, and then tell us that many of those pictures are not too dark under any normal photographic standards. For several days you've been abrasive in many of your comments. Why not just lurk for awhile and adjust your attitude? It must be so hard for someone like you to put up with us inferior creatures. - -- Jim - http://www.hemenway.com Stuart Phillips wrote: > > It's really bizarre that the first thought that came to a couple of > people on the list is that her photos were a result of technical > malfunctions. Gee was it a faulty meter or the fact she's working on a > Mac. Or maybe she's not telling her story quite clearly enough. How > condescending. More likely we're not even her intended audience. > > Stuart Phillips > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ted Grant [mailto:tedgrant@shaw.ca] > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 6:39 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] WOW! > > Kim wrote: > > >>> I'm not a pj, so help me out here. > > > > Is it that her work isn't....accurate enough? > > > > Is it that she's not telling a story? > > > > I guess I'm asking is it that you think her skills (whether technical > or > > compostional) aren't up to par or is it the ....content and format fly > in > the > > face of "traditional" photojournalism?<<< > > Hi Kim, > Good questions and from my point of view as a photojournalist I'll put a > personal spin to them > > > Is it that her work isn't....accurate enough?<<< > Nope, it's different and accurate enough in her eyes. In mine? Well it's > difficult, as I don't see it as I've shot my work for 50 years as a > published photographer. > > >>> Is it that she's not telling a story?<< > To some degree, but these days everyone thinks they're photojournalists > with > a collection of single pictures, which wasn't the meaning originally of > photojournalist, "a story teller with pictures generally on one subject > ." > And what we see in the pictures presented are a collection of > photographs > shot some what in "art fashion" instead, as what's considered > photojournalism. > > >>> I guess I'm asking is it that you think her skills (whether > technical or > > compostional) aren't up to par or is it the ....content and format fly > in > the > > face of "traditional" photojournalism?<<< > > No I think her skills are well up to par because if they weren't, then > she's > one damn lucky photographer to capture the photographs we see. They're > consistent in technique, so she's got the skills and then some. Actually > I'd > like to see more of what she shoots on a daily basis and not a selection > of > pictures shot over a period of time.. > > Well the content certainly flies in the face of what's "traditional" > photojournalism, certainly if you consider telling a story on a subject > as > traditional. That doesn't mean she's not a photojournalist, as she may > do > major photo stories and that's where the PJ title comes from > > Put what you see here up against what was considered photojournalism in > the > old LIFE magazine then the subjects are miles apart. Again this doesn't > mean she's not good. > > As Tina pointed out she's working as a staff shooter: > > >>But she works as a PJ - on staff at the Sydney Morning Herald. "Now > based > in Sydney, Narelle is a staff photographer at the Sydney Morning Herald. > Previously, she worked at the Adelaide Advertiser. She was the principal > photographer for News Limited's London bureau and freelanced in the > USA."<<<< > > What would be interesting is, what she shoots for the paper and not what > we > see here. Question is, is she winning these awards for what she shoots > daily as a staff photographer or what's here? And if this is the kind of > thing being published, to what amount is the work used? > > Or what we see on her website, is it a " personal photo project" Or is > it > being shot for illustrations as her regularly published work? > > Not sure if this answers any of your questions and making a judgement > call > on another photographer, certainly one who's won these awards, makes for > the > sound of sour grapes, so one must be very careful how one responds! ;-) > > ted > > -- > 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