Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/10/01

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

Subject: [Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work)
From: philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent)
Date: Mon Oct 1 11:37:00 2007
References: <4268A9826B9DBE4D938B902A6BC803083944EF@exchange8.asc.local> <46FF6D91.1040007@hemenway.com> <000601c80351$4be56be0$6401a8c0@asus930> <471B7676-3F5A-4F05-914F-C9C6A3A88E70@cox.net> <7.0.1.0.2.20070930132131.0249d030@comporium.net> <D04F9AF2-C40C-46E9-8038-F2F75E62EABE@cox.net> <C193A720-D8A8-44E6-A43F-7073F249E961@mac.com> <4701223B.8000505@waltjohnson.com> <47013092.5030000@numericable.fr> <B5026FCC-3BE7-4371-9246-A45E23939BAB@cox.net> <47013709.1050500@waltjohnson.com> <1BE06EDB-74B5-4957-81D8-67E8CDE9C609@mac.com> <470138E2.4010701@waltjohnson.com>

> Next I'll be accused of dirty stuff.

Walt, you are so right.
With all the fuzz about SEX this was becoming a very frivolous  
discussion. So very fin de si?cle.
Meanwhile, we're almost 8 years already into the new millenium.
For how long will we have to suffer this 20th century puritanism?
No, the turn you gave this interpretation battle is so much more  
interesting.

About photography, I think a photo can never be real. It can only  
give an impression of reality.
Impression leads to interpretation. Interpretation to discussion.  
Which makes this all so interesting.

Philippe

>
> Lottermoser George wrote:
>> I like it. Rings true - this slicing of reality into little fake  
>> pieces (i think hole mixes metaphors ;~)
>>
>> Regards,
>> George Lottermoser
>> george@imagist.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 1, 2007, at 1:06 PM, Walt Johnson wrote:
>>
>>> Or is it slice the reality into little fake holes?
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
In reply to: Message from kcassidy at asc.upenn.edu (Kyle Cassidy) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (G Hopkinson) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from phamard at numericable.fr (Philippe Amard) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))