Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/03/07

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Michiel's PAW 9
From: Daniel Ridings <daniel.ridings@muspro.uio.no>
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 10:01:03 +0100 (MET)
References: <404A0D7D.6070604@wanadoo.nl> <015001c40408$9515cd60$87d86c18@gv.shawcable.net> <404AC893.1070200@wanadoo.nl> <000901c40418$91e8dd20$87d86c18@gv.shawcable.net>

I picked them up the first time. I didn't notice the background at all
though, since there isn't much there.

This is the way we learn. We try something and see what the reactions are.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. There's only one way to find
out.

Just a reminder: every once in a while the LUG gets accused of not
reacting to photographs with critiquess etc ... or that all the critiques
are pats on the back.

Maybe the shot didn't work this time, but the LUG does.

Daniel

On Sat, 6 Mar 2004, Ted Grant wrote:

> Michiel,
> Honestly I didn't see them. All I saw was a person without a face and an out
> of focus background.
> ted
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michiel Fokkema" <michiel.fokkema@wanadoo.nl>
> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 11:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Michiel's PAW 9
>
>
> > Hi Ted,
> >
> > Thanks for your commment. In principle I agree with you but in this case
> > i thought the reflection of her eyes in the window and the horse in the
> > background would make a picture. But if you don't see it, it certainly
> > failed.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Michiel Fokkema
> >
> >
> >
> > Ted Grant wrote:
> >
> > > Michiel Fokkema showed:
> > >
> > >>This weeks PAW shows my wife who is watching the horse back riding of
> > >>one of our daughters. I could have used a bit more dof but there was not
> > >>much light.
> > >>
> > >>http://home.wanadoo.nl/michiel.fokkema/Fotografie/paw2004/9.html<<<,
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello Michiel,
> > > Sorry me old son, it just doesn't cut it at all as it's an exposure and
> > > that's it. Actually there isn't anything to make any kind of subject
> sense.
> > >
> > > You see here's what happened. You were there, you know what your good
> wife
> > > is looking at, but your picture show's nothing of it or her properly.
> > >
> > > We don't see her eyes or partial face with an eye illustrating she's
> looking
> > > at something. And in your caption you say:
> > >
> > >
> > >>>>I could have used a bit more dof but there was not much light.<<<<<
> > >
> > >
> > > That maybe the case, but there wasn't a picture to start with, so DOF
> depth
> > > is meaningless.
> > >
> > > Please understand I'm not giving you a hard time, because quite frankly
> we,
> > > everyone on this list, does the same thing at some time or other. Our
> "being
> > > there, making an exposure, feeling the emotions, the environment of the
> > > location, all create feelings" when we squeeze the shutter release that
> are
> > > not recorded on film for others to see. "We" may feel it long after,
> > > actually many years after,  but it's truly never on film although in our
> > > feelings it is.
> > >
> > > But we the photographer's feel them as though they're vividly captured
> on
> > > film! Hey, we, all of us. I still for over 53 years do it on occasion,
> > > usually in family situations but not on the professional side for some
> > > reason, do it when I'm photographing some of my 10 grand children I get
> > > hooked by what you've attempted to show in this photograph.
> > >
> > > And mon ami it just doesn't happen, nor did it happen here.
> > >
> > > I truly hope I've made myself clear and not ticked you off, but in
> absolute
> > > truth this isn't a picture other than in your minds eye! Correct
> exposure?
> > > Yes! Picture with some understandable content? No. Better luck next
> time, so
> > > simply keep shooting your daughter riding, therefore shoot lots and get
> > > better.
> > >
> > > 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

In reply to: Message from Michiel Fokkema <michiel.fokkema@wanadoo.nl> ([Leica] Michiel's PAW 9)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] Michiel's PAW 9)
Message from Michiel Fokkema <michiel.fokkema@wanadoo.nl> (Re: [Leica] Michiel's PAW 9)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] Michiel's PAW 9)