Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/01/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Tuesday, January 14, 2003, at 06:25 PM, Alan Weinschel wrote: > I agree with Martin. Since I have used the analogy before, and since I > still consider it apt, here goes: if 100 monkeys turn out 300 pages of > crap, is picking out a page or two or twelve where the random typing > created a word considered "editing"? Hipshooting isn't random. It does introduce a larger element of chance into the compositional game, but there are tradeoffs in the speed of response. If you take a look at the contact sheets of any well-known street photographer you will discover that most of them hipshoot, some almost exclusively. Robert Frank certainly did it, HCB too, and Garry Winogrand (despite his over-strenuous protestations to the contrary). What if I had not told you that they were hipshot, and presented one frame that you liked? Would knowing it was hipshot change the picture? Why should it therefore change your response to it? What if I had taken a million frames, and one was a masterpiece? What if I told you that this picture: http://www.pinkheadedbug.com/portfolios/humantraffic/edits/hard/pages/ 001.html was shot without looking through the viewfinder? (I chose it because a lot of people like that one). Was it? I've absolutely no idea. That's how much difference it makes. I don't mind at all if you think all 300+ images are crap. In fact I invited you to submit a 'null edit' if you really found nothing of value in there. But why we should judge pictures by the number of pictures that are discarded is beyond me. It's as if we should judge a sculpture by the shards that fly off from the chisel. - -- John Brownlow - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html