Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/26

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

Subject: [Leica] Is that so wrong?
From: bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen)
Date: Sat Feb 26 18:42:30 2005

Fair question, Philippe - I think I mean accurate in the sense of true,
or is that circular? I'm not suggesting that the photographer shouldn't
be able to shoot the scene as he or she 'sees' it - only that what is
captured in that frame, that which is frozen, be true to what the
photographer saw - that nothing be added or taken out after the fact.
But then I'm applying photo journalistic or documentary standards, and
not all photography is governed by those standards. ;-)

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
Philippe Orlent
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 6:35 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Is that so wrong?


B.D.,
Why is the word "accurate" in your definition?


> From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
> Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:25:42 -0500
> To: 'Leica Users Group' <lug@leica-users.org>
> Subject: RE: [Leica] Is that so wrong?
> 
> "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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 


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


Replies: Reply from ericm at pobox.com (Eric) ([Leica] Re: Is that so wrong?)
In reply to: Message from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] Is that so wrong?)