Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]"Photographics," photo illustrations, photo mud puddles are fine - as long as they are presented as such. But if something is presented as a "photograph," it should be an accurate representation of a single instant in time, as interpreted by the photographer - at least that's my position, and I'm sticking to it. :-) -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Kenneth Frazier Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 1:22 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Is that so wrong? bob wrote: > but I'd like to know > that > what I'm looking at represents a thing, person, time, and place that > actually > existed. > Is that so wrong? I've noticed that many of the local photo shows I've been to recently feature "photo"s(?) that are apparently "graphics" images....Photoshopped, or something. One of my artist friends who attends with me views them with puzzlement, as do I. No offense to any of you who prefer the "photo-graphics" approach. Ken Frazier _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information