[Leica] Best known photo ?

[bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen)]

HAYZEUSHKEEEERIST, Mathew - It IS journalism. It WAS journalism. It was
taken as a photo of a soldier dying in combat. PERIOD. 

The question isn't failure or success - it's truth or lie. LIE. IF the
photo was faked, it was and is a LIE, because it purported to be REAL,
and it has always been held up as such.

But this conversation has gotten ridiculous, as it has been established
that the photo is real.



-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
Matthew Powell
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 9:27 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Best known photo ?


On May 12, 2004, at 3:01 PM, B. D. Colen wrote:
> NOT TRUE.
>
> IF it was faked - and based on the present evidence, I believe it was 
> real - but IF it was fake, then he indeed disguised it as something - 
> he disguised it as a photograph of a soldier who had just been shot, 
> dying in combat. Period.
>
> Capa was on assignment, to shoot the war in Spain. And that is what he

> shot. He was not just taking "pictures" - he was a journalist with a 
> camera. And thus to submit a faked photo is to submit a lie.
>
> What is so complicated about that?

As a piece of journalism - something to run in the paper, to inform 
people about a specific event or situation - maybe it would be a 
failure. But today, or even then - it wasn't a photograph about a 
specific man dying. It wasn't evidence.

I think there's a problem in equating this, as someone has noted, with 
journalism that's meant to act as evidence - faked abuse photos or the 
photoshopped Kerry-Fonda photos. If Capa's photo was supposed to 
illustrate something specific about which it lied, then I'd agree with 
you.

But as I see it, the photo does nothing of the sort.

MP 

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information