Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/07/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Peter, it's much more simple. Newspaper photography doesn't require finesse. It just requires pictures. I've seen so many pictures of kids with bloated bellies and flies, I forget who shot what, and why. I no longer care. Newspaper photography has upgraded itself into photojournalism, and along with the name change came a new-found worth. They now think of themselves as changing the world through their images. Two problems with that thought are: 1) Photojournalism has changed almost nothing. (2 Photojournalists are just as apt to be jackasses as bright, open human beings. What photojournalism has going for it is that it has become a sacred cow. One would be hard pressed to find empirical proof that photojournalism has had any profound effect on the world. One can find ample proof that art has profoundly changed the world. One need only look to the 1960s-1970s. The music, art, and literature played a profound role in changing American and European culture. It wasn't politics, and it wasn't newspaper photography. Five years of Disco changed the world more than 90 years of photojournalism. Allan On Wednesday, July 31, 2002, at 05:11 PM, Peter Klein wrote: > As you've said before, you get the fastest lenses you can, and you get > the subject in focus. Bokeh, shmokeh. Fine-art aesthetic > considerations don't matter to you, you say. To which, I would add the > word "consciously." You've simply integrated into your shooting style > the arty considerations that matter to you, and you just do what comes > naturally after decades of professional experience. - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html