Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/18

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: PAW5
From: robertwschwartz at (Robert Schwartz)
Date: Fri Feb 18 18:05:32 2005

At 04:19 PM 2/18/2005, Ted wrote:
>> Yuck!  As a photograph, no redeeming qualities.<<<<<<<<
>Please explain "Yuck! and no redeeming qualities?" As they are comments 
>visually descriptive as to the problem with the photograph. So we can 
>what you mean and how you'd correct it."
>thank you,

Mr. Grant,

You, sir, are a true and great photographer. Your photographs have all of 
the proper compositional elements and lighting that make for outstanding 
visual (photographically redeeming) qualities. I have one of your books. 
Wonderful photographs.

The photograph in PAW5 looks like what I get on the first few frames after 
the film leader when loading film. Close the back and fire off a few frames. 
The results are usually crooked (angled), poorly exposed, basically non 
photographs. PAW5 is crooked, totally improperly exposed (and processed if 
film), and what might be considered a subject, competes so violently with 
the railing and background, it's virtually impossible to find. It is a 
collage of underexposure and lens flare.

I suspect the photograph is indeed a frame from loading film or if it is a 
digital photograph, then it was an accidental pushing of the shutter release.

But my "fire away" analysis stands. It's a non photograph. It is simply 
light struck silver halide or pixels. No redeeming photographic qualities.
The PAW5 author stated: "fire away". I simply obliged with my personal 
opinion. I apologize for not elaborating the first time around.


Do you Yahoo!?
 Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'

Replies: Reply from bdcolen at (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Re: PAW5)
Reply from feli2 at (Feli) ([Leica] Re: PAW5)
Reply from tedgrant at (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Re: PAW5 ...... YUCK!)