Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/01/19

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

Subject: [Leica] Dehumanizing portraits?
From: sethrosner at nycap.rr.com (Seth Rosner)
Date: Mon Jan 19 05:46:33 2009
References: <5B13112AD743CA6EF73CB6B2@hindolveston.reid.org>, <4973962B.11269.91BB30@leica.rcmckee.com>, <BLU0-SMTP634F5EB85591FB0C09557ABED30@phx.gbl> <4973AC07.25253.E71EFE@leica.rcmckee.com>

I think Clayton has it. It is almost not conceivable to me that this is all 
an accident or is due to a photographer's incompetence. His comment reminds 
me that I am about to write to the Kraft Company about its Catalina salad 
dressing, perhaps the only commercial ready-to-use dressing I like. I 
recently bought a container only to find that Kraft has created a new 
'improved' version that to my taste is too sharp, in fact, awful.

'If it ain't broke, don't fix it' is an axiom that must not be applied to 
any of the creative  arts, else nothing new would ever happen. But this 
effort is a stretch and very curious in the political arena where leaders 
depend on creating feelings of confidence and amiability. Very odd.

Seth

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "R. Clayton McKee" <leica@rcmckee.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Dehumanizing portraits?


> Quoth the Kevin Argue :
>
>> Clayton,
>>                I wouldn't call this dehumanizing or new > photographic 
>> style.  The photos are just bad!
>>
>> Kevin Argue
>
>
> The thing is, they're consistent in style, approach, and execution,
> and they've been edited down to what we see.  That means the problem
> isn't accident, or incompetence, or lack of vision, all of which I
> look for in a bad photograph or series.
>
> To me, when a shooter of some ability (at least technically) and an
> editor of some (presumed) ability unleash something like this, we're
> FAR beyond merely "bad" photographs.  This is not just random
> awfulness. It's a carefully calculated effort, either to create a
> brand identity for the artiste and, if possible, a market FOR that
> brand, or to create some sort of marketing buzz for the NYT Magazine.
>
> I could almost agree with Brian that it was a deliberate effort to
> make the subjects look bad, except that the trend in recent years has
> been SO heavily towards "Do Something Different" without regard for
> whether "different" is "better" that in this case I think it's more
> likely 'self-promotion' and 'branding' than anything else  ... which
> is what makes me call it a "style."  It's sad; there are at least a
> dozen LUGgers who could do better easily.   Should've called Cassidy;
> he's just as cutting edge and hip, but he's also got taste.
>
>
> --
>
>
> R. Clayton McKee                           http://www.rcmckee.com
> Photojournalist                               rcmckee@rcmckee.com
> P O Box 571900                           voice/fax   713/783-3502
> Houston, TX 77257-1900                   cell phone #  on request
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.9/1902 - Release Date: 1/19/2009 
9:37 AM


In reply to: Message from reid at mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (Brian Reid) ([Leica] Dehumanizing portraits?)
Message from leica at rcmckee.com (R. Clayton McKee) ([Leica] Dehumanizing portraits?)
Message from kargue at sympatico.ca (Kevin Argue) ([Leica] Dehumanizing portraits?)
Message from leica at rcmckee.com (R. Clayton McKee) ([Leica] Dehumanizing portraits?)