Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/01/03

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

Subject: [Leica] Image criteria - a Luddite view
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 14:21:29 -0600
References: <AANLkTi=jTDTcx=JhLRE3_zCqQCxDkwBZZa80K8Zn2QVw@mail.gmail.com>

Using the LUG, and other online galleries to post images
does not mean that the images do not also go to print.
Quite a number of LUG image posters also sell prints
and license the printing of their images.

Technical quality remains an important goal for any serious photographer;
right along with aesthetic, conceptual and emotional quality,
pleasing self, clients and others.

Attempting to prioritize these "qualities"
and/or "visual elements" makes very little sense.

Working a scene, a set, a subject 
requires an organic and fluid interaction;
and all these elements and qualities are being weighed,
compromised and decided upon as necessary and possible.

Regards,
George Lottermoser 
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist

On Jan 3, 2011, at 10:01 AM, Lawrence Zeitlin wrote:

> I agree with most of the image quality criteria proposed, especially those
> which deal with the image's emotional impact, but I wonder why many LUG
> posts seem to obsess over the latest and greatest Leica lenses and the size
> of the latest electronic sensors. While these may be interesting topics in
> themselves, they have almost nothing to do with the pictures posted on the
> LUG and viewed on a computer screen. Follow Dr. Ted and not Irwin Puts.



Replies: Reply from tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca) ([Leica] Image criteria - a Luddite view NOW- "THE VIEW!")
In reply to: Message from lrzeitlin at gmail.com (Lawrence Zeitlin) ([Leica] Image criteria - a Luddite view)