Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/04/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I collect wire photos, especially the ones dealing with Labor. So I know what you're saying has some grounding in reality. But even by those standards, this image is a disaster. By the way, AP, TIME, etc., do not give up rights on an image, ever, and never. The only revelation I see here, is that the photographer got punked by an uncooperative subject. It's the kind of image that a novice would make when confronted by a difficult sitter. When one is out on a shoot, there's the best case scenario and worse case scenario. For each you have a plan, plan A, plan B, etc., and that's coming in cold. For this shot, there had to be prior notification. A lot of going back and forth over his schedule. All that busy stuff that an assigning editor had to do to set it up. In the image you're showing us, I don't think Stevens gave the photog more than a minute. I don't think the photographer had any plan either, judging by the shot. If you look in the AP style manual, it addresses such a situation. Obviously the camera operator did not read it. S.d. On Apr 15, 2010, at 10:47 PM, Vince Passaro wrote: > What flare in which corner? > > Do you guys know how AP photographs worked? They came in over the wire and > were recomposed at the paper; that print then is kept in a library (at > some > papers) until being digitized, probably in like 1997, badly; you're so far > from whatever the original was to discuss its sharpness is silly. If the > image came last week from AP directly that too is how it would have > survived; it's only marginally possible that anyone worked with the > original > print again after it went out over the wires in 1976. But I suspect this > was > in the Times' library and then digitized because I believe AP's photo > library was sold to Bettman or Getty at some point so if the image had been > bought last week it wouldn't have said "AP" I don't think. I could be wrong > on that front however. > > In any case you ain't looking at it like human bein' . A thousand more > technically correct headshots wouldn't reveal the man in quite this way, or > at all, and I happened to look at a lot of them in the wake of becoming > interested in this photograph. He was superficially a dull man and not > easy > to "find" but this picture does -- in part by getting (literally) > underneath > him. It's beautifully composed. > > Nathan I figured out the "flare" you indicated. If that were flare it would > mean the trash can was on fire. It's not flare; it's damage to the print. > The light's coming fron entirely the other direction. > > You guys better not go to the HCB show at MoMA. A lot of his pictures > aren't > so sharp either. > > > > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 1:17 AM, slobodan Dimitrov > <s.dimitrov at charter.net>wrote: > >> It's from the very worst period in photography, when the 35mm SLR >> manufactures jammed the public with their trash. >> S.d. >> >> >> On Apr 15, 2010, at 10:08 PM, Nathan Wajsman wrote: >> >>> That was my reaction to it as well. Unsharp, lots of flare in the corner. >>> >>> Nathan >>> >>> Nathan Wajsman >>> Alicante, Spain >>> http://www.frozenlight.eu >>> http://www.greatpix.eu >>> http://www.nathanfoto.com >>> >>> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0 >>> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws >>> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Apr 16, 2010, at 6:57 AM, slobodan Dimitrov wrote: >>> >>>> You're kidding, right? >>>> It's a hideous image! >>>> S.d. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Apr 15, 2010, at 8:39 PM, Vince Passaro wrote: >>>> >>>>> This picture ran on the front page of the New York Times the day after >>>>> Stevens announced his resignation. They still have it on the lens >> blog. >>>>> It's an uncredited AP photo. I like it a lot, I think it's a great >>>>> photograph. I wonder what others think, and, specifically, what size >> lens >>>>> people think it was taken with. I'm thinking 35mm or even 28mm and >> cropped >>>>> but I don't know nothin'. >>>>> >>>>> People's reactions would be of great interest to me. >>>>> >>>>> Here's the url: >>>>> >> http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/04/09/us/20100409-stevens-slideshow_index.html?ref=politics >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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