[Leica] BLUR - My last words.

[kcarney1 at cox.net (Ken Carney)]

Our cat is a fan of "The Walking Dead".  

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
grduprey at mchsi.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 6:05 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] BLUR - My last words.

As does our dog.  He jumps at loud noises from the tv, and barks at images
of animals on it also.

Gene

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Barbour" <steve.barbour at gmail.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 9:00:54 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Re: [Leica] BLUR - My last words.


On Aug 14, 2013, at 5:43 AM, lrzeitlin at aol.com wrote:

> Forget about all that nonsense about flapping hummingbird's wings and
moving fan blades. You can't see speeding bullets either. If we were trying
to truly depict reality, any photo which shows a hummingbird's wings clearly
is false. George Lottermoser sums it up best by saying:
> "two dimensional visual art relies on convention, creativity and
technology."
> 
> 
> Any two dimensional photo is an artifact which requires considerable
learning to interpret. Most discussions of photographic "truth" tend to
obscure the fact that ALL photographs are abstract representations of an
external world. When Margaret Mead showed Tahitian natives black and white
photographs of themselves and their village, they rotated the photos this
way and that, shook their heads, and handed them back. "Nice designs", they
said, "but what are they?" Mead then realized that photographs were such
abstractions that only long experience enables their interpretation.
> 
> 
> Closer to home, your dog does not jump into the TV screen to frolic in the
fields shown in the dog food commercials. Neither does it growl or flee from
the TV intruders in your household. The image on TV is not the real world to
the animal but a flickering pattern on an illuminated tube. We see the image
as a depiction of reality because our intelligence and experience enables us
infer the scene from its abstract representation. The animal does not.




***my puppy does....






> 
> 
> The article that George cites is the best short piece I have seen on the
depiction of motion in art. Read it.
> http://www.sophia.org/tutorials/elements-of-art-movement-and-time
> 
> 
> My comments are based on the feeling that most LUGGERS are so immersed in
two dimensional image making that they assume the learned conventions of
photography represent the world as seen by the human eye. I am nearsighted.
When I remove my glasses EVERYTHING is blurred. When I wake up in the
morning am I to assume that the world is in violent motion which stops the
moment I put on my glasses?
> 
> 
> I am not a zealot on the topic. If you look at my own submissions to the
Motion contest, you will see that I use both techniques, blur and content,
to imply motion. Horses for courses I say.
> 
> 
> &lt;http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Larry+Z/Dive_001.jpg.html&gt;
> &lt;http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Larry+Z/Basketball.jpg.html&gt;
> 
> 
> Larry Z
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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