Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/05/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It has to be hard to be good, no matter what field of endeavor we pursue. If it were easy there would be many more Ansel Adams, Gene Smiths, Salgados, Yo Yo Mas, etc. There is nothing about seeing reality that limits one to acute representation of what is in front of the camera. The ability to see more means we become more. I certainly do appreciate the effort which goes into making a great photograph, painting,or a piece of music. That doesn't limit my enjoyment of the effort to appreciation of craftsmanship, because vision is what counts. (IMO) You are certainly right about interpretation but to deny reality on that basis becomes too metaphysical for me. Have you noticed the trend in art which became evident when the camera was available to supplant the exact representation of nature? It seems as if the entire structure of art changed directions. Of course, this is just supposition on my part but in 170 or so years since photography was invented the same trend seem to be evident. Now, if we could only find that good bar. ;-) We could talk about some of my favorites like Picasso, Dali, Munch and Goya Walt Philippe Orlent wrote: > Why should it always be hard to be good? > > If it really would be about that, then you are appreciating the > effort of making a photograph more than the photograph itself. > Do you like a painting because it was hard to make it or because of > what's on the canvas? > Do you like a painting because it's a perfect reproduction of > reality, or because of the interpretation of that reality by the > painter? > It's exactly the same. Just a different technique. > > Another question: B.D. just showed us a wonderful series of > photographs, reporting style. Amongst them is a beautiful shot of a > laborant seen through a petri dish. It is obviously 'staged': the > photographer interfered in the reality, asking the lady to hold the > petri dish in a certain way, to be able to shoot it through the dish. > It's a constructed photograph, too. Nonetheless it stays a beautiful > shot, showing how B.D. 'saw' that moment. > IMO making or taking pictures is all about the interpretation of a > situation. A real photograph does not exist. > > Great stuff to talk about somewhere in a good bar with good, > uninterfering music on the background ;-) > > > > > Op 7-mei-06, om 18:14 heeft Walt Johnson het volgende geschreven: > >> I don't think making real images is only related to reportage. It >> is, in my opinion, much harder to make real photographs that to >> construct them. Even in the days before Photoshop there were methods >> of making unreal look real. Of course, it is just a personal thing >> and in no way detracts from your efforts...A nice "Magritte". >> >> Walt >> >> Philippe Orlent wrote: >> >>> Which brings us back to the once and a while popping up basic >>> discussion about photography: does making a photograph is less >>> good than taking one? >>> Why should one know how a photograph was made, unless if it's to >>> check that it's not messing around with facts? Which only has a >>> good purpose if it's about reportage IMO, where the only issue is >>> to reproduce reality. >>> >>> >>> >>> Op 7-mei-06, om 17:50 heeft Walt Johnson het volgende geschreven: >>> >>>> Philippe: >>>> >>>> Damn, why did you have to tell us that? I was a little perplexed >>>> by the scale but assumed the moon just looked bigger in your part >>>> of the world. First rule of thumb for any Leica shooter is: >>>> >>>> 1. Even if I fake it I will deny it with such conviction I begin >>>> to believe myself. >>>> >>>> Walt >>>> >>>> Philippe Orlent wrote: >>>> >>>>> Don: Margritte is a Belgian surrealist painter who used the moon >>>>> (and clouds) a lot in his work. >>>>> Luis: it is a double exposure, if one could still call it that >>>>> in the PS era. No retraceable pixels on the dark side though. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you all that already looked and commented, >>>>> Philippe >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Op 7-mei-06, om 16:24 heeft Don Dory het volgende geschreven: >>>>> >>>>>> Philippe, >>>>>> I don't know about Magritte, but still a pleasing composition. >>>>>> >>>>>> Don >>>>>> don.dory@gmail.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 5/7/06, Philippe Orlent <philippe.orlent@pandora.be> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dunno... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.fullflavor.be/photography/_DSC0124.jpg >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Comments are welcomed. >>>>>>> Thanks for looking, >>>>>>> Philippe >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >