Re: [Leica] Today's Great Photographers (Values Question)

[LP6@aol.com]

Michael Leitheiser:

Thanks for your comment and inquiry.  I'm responding on the LUG so that others
with interests in photographic values might share. 

Slightly Off Topic Discussion Follows:  Apologize for word count.  I know the
delete key is merciful and use it abundantly myself and trust others will vote
with this key as well; but, for those having an interest in values and
photography I offer the following:  

You ask whether an identification of "differences in core values" might then
result in the equivalent of aptitude testing applicable to one's work world
and/or personal world.  The answer is yes, if a special effort is made.  This
is far more than I'm proposing here.  It is something I've done in another
time and place.  

For present purposes our valuemetric goal is to identify  how "successful"
photographers value making use of our ability to measure the three core
dimensions of value.

What are the three core dimensions of value: 

   They are Intrinsic (I), Extrinsic (E) and Systemic (S).  The three make up
protovaluation.  From this base or foundation of broad valuation, belief
system modulation and focusing produces more sharply defined means/ends
values.  This is the middle level of valuation or mesovaluation.  In the value
cascade there is yet another refinement of valuation into more narrowly
focused attitudinal valuation.  Thus we have a cascade of value structures in
"cognitive space" begining with broad band valuation  (I, E, S valuation), to
highly focused attitudinal valuation.  My work is at the level of I, E, S
valuation.  I'm asking the question what are the I, E, S patterns or
signatures of successful photographers.  

What are I, E, and S:

When looking at the "world".... Intrinsic value vision (I) centers on persons;
Extrinsic value visions (E) centers on the practical and social and S value
vision centers on concepts, thought, patterns, composition, systems and order.
When looking at the "self" these value lenses of the "mind" mean something
different, which doesn't concern us here.  

I would hypothesize that photographic skill should correlate with a
hierarchically ordering of these dimensions as follows:   I > E > S.  We might
also expect them to be in relative blance (as to absolute values), with one
among them standing out as slightly stronger than the rest giving some measure
of individuality and unjiqueness to the photographer.  Testing twenty
photographers would give us as least the outlines of  the I, E, and S profiles
of photographic success.  We would have in hand  some measure of the
valuemetric signature of the right stuff, so to speak!   In the real world,
however, all we'd have is a  relative deepening of our understanding and at
best only an approximation of the value vison of a good photographer!
(Remember, a good photographer is more of the expert at  concept selection and
one who finds it easier to fulfill his or her concept of a good picture where
the image captured correlates highly with his or her concept more  often than
the less skillful photographer.  

So much for this introduction to value vision and photography,  If others have
questions why, then, I'd be pleased to hear from you.  However, I will be away
from my computer Wednesday through Sunday attendling to other matters.

Leon
LP6@aol.com

Axiology6@aol.com