Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/06/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Dear BD, Philippe, Arche and Steve, Thanks for looking and commenting. I take all your points. Certainly, I am well aware that I am not my own best editor - few of us are as we get irrationally attached to pictures. However, I, like many of us, am posting "work in progress", rather than definitive collections, in order to get feedback from others, afterwards I am more concerned with the next set of negatives to sit on the lightbox to make the effort to go back and prune the website. Ideally, I would like to pass prints around to some fellow photographers over a drink in order to get critical input. The website and the LUG provide an alternative that is more extensive but less intimate, but is useful nonetheless. On a more technical side, I shot five films and used the 28mm virtually exclusively - I'm not one of those persons who has always got the "wrong" lens on the camera, I just put a lens on and use it all day. The previous set, "may", were shot with the 35mm with which I do most of my work and am therefore more at home; also because of its smaller size it is less intrusive. John Thanks for On 20/06/06, B. D. Colen <bdcolen@comcast.net> wrote: > To answer your questions about the T shots, Arche, yes - but my axing and > yours are two different things; I've had a former Magnum editor go through > the, and the curator of a major photo collection - but more about that > later. And that's gotten them to where they are. ;-) > > I would never, by the way, suggest that someone post to elicit criticism > and > then decide what should be kept and what should be discarded. All that's > doing is seeing what those who pass by happen to like, and we know that > those who pass by consider Kincade a great painter, and that woman who > turns > babies into vegetables perhaps the world's greatest photographer. > > Note that Winnogrand didn't put those negatives on public display and ask > which ones people thought should be printed - he simply gave himself some > distance. I'd suggest that the only people whose judgment matters in terms > of selection are the artist, and that handful of people whose judgment the > artist trusts. > > B. D. > > > On 6/20/06 3:00 PM, "Arche, Harvey" <Harvey.Arche@jp2hs.org> wrote: > > > B.D. wrote: > > Edit, edit, edit. I'm struck by how good some of your street stuff is > > John - > > really strong images that either amuse, bemuse, or confuse. But then they > > are surrounded by far too many images that are simply photos of people on > > the street. Any one doing serious street photography is going to have > > dozens > > and dozens of those throw aways for each gem; the trick is to throw them > > away. :-) > > > > B. D. > > > > > > On 6/20/06 11:17 AM, "John Beeching" <johnbeeching@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Dear All, > >> > >> Some photos from my recent visit to Amsterdam. > >> http://staff.bath.ac.uk/bssjrb/Photographic/dutch/dutch.htm > >> > >> Mostly 28mm Elmarit, one 35mm Summicron, one 90mm Elmarit. All Tri-X > >> in Xtol 1+3. > >> > >> Comments and criticisms welcome, as always. > >> > >> Thanks for looking, > >> > >> John > > > > A couple of things. Great pictures, John, but overall not as powerful as > > your > > recent 'May' posting, so in a way I'm in agreement with B.D.. Some really > > terrific stuff scattered in there. > > On the other hand, I tend to view what goes on here as a consensual > > working > > space. Yesterday, and earlier this morning, I was thinking a lot about > > how > > much crap I had building up in my galleries. I tend to post a lot more > > junk > > than I might, in the clear light of reason, actually want to be > > publically > > associated with. I think many of us do. And I will continue do so (B.D., > > have > > you taken an axe to the 'T-shots' yet? ;^)) because just airing the damn > > things gives me a degree of perspective, or at least psychological > > distance, > > that I wouldn't get letting them sit cluttering up my desktop. I don't > > even > > need to get any feedback, its simply knowing the stuff is getting > > tracked up > > by other people's eyes. > > Winogrand, and apparently Henry Wessel, let their negs sit for a year > > before > > looking at them in order to get that distance. Jeez, I wish I had the > > time and > > their organizational ability (not to mention eyes, insight, and > > artistry). > > Meanwhile I've got a diaperload generating heat in Brian's servers. And > > that's > > just wrong (even as imagery). What to do about it? I decided this > > morning: > > Binge-Purge. Go about the business of posting and eliciting criticism > > (next: a > > day at the dragstrip). But come December, and the winding-down of '06, > > I'm > > going to streamline the year's postings down to the, say, 10% of stuff I > > still > > think of as 'keepers'. > > Does this mean I'm advocating an indiscrimate, scatter-gun approach to > > selecting what gets posted? Of course not. In that, the forum is like the > > marketplace: after a while nobody even looks at a product that sucks. > > Generally speaking, even if I put up a bunch of images in a given post, > > there > > are probably fewer than 8% of the total from the shoot that make that > > first > > cut. I'm willing to bet that John shot 10x as many images in Amsterdam as > > we're seeing. > > So, 'edit, edit, edit'? Yes, of course, but after - not before - taking > > advantage of the tool that best helps me do it. > > GOYA & Shoot, > > Arche > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -- John Beeching http://staff.bath.ac.uk/bssjrb/Photographic/photo.htm