Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/10/03

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

Subject: [Leica] Venice
From: shino at (Rei Shinozuka)
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 20:24:05 -0400
References: <> <030301cb6358$dd7f4b10$987de130$@net>

Having grown up in NYC and worked there, I simply loathe large 
advertisements.  From the article I had the impression that the ads were 
put on scaffolding used in the repair of the structures.  The ads are 
unsightly all right, but presumably not much worse than the base 
scaffolding and presumably only up for the duration of the repair work.  
Perhaps there could be a compromise where the ads could be in monochrome 
so as to be less visually jarring.  As Jim notes, if the other choices 
to fund renovation are higher taxes for residents or visitors, or simply 
neglect of the structures, this solution might not be so bad.


On 10/03/2010 08:12 PM, Jim Shulman wrote:
>  That usually has something to do with it.
> Jim Shulman
> (who understands that the competing needs of municipal budgets and 
> aesthetic
> preservation put us all in a venetian bind.)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: at
> [ at] On Behalf Of Tina
> Manley
> Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2010 8:05 PM
> To: lug
> Subject: [Leica] Venice
> LUG:
> This is absolutely awful:
> n-foster
> How have we gotten to this state?
> (Maybe this should be on LugForum, but it does involve photography as
> advertising.)
> Tina

Replies: Reply from jsmith342 at (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Venice)
In reply to: Message from images at (Tina Manley) ([Leica] Venice)
Message from jshul at (Jim Shulman) ([Leica] Venice)