Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Jim, not at all; and it is far from being a stupid question ;-) The subject is the view, not the landscape itself but the landscape as altered by the early evening mist. So it's the light, the shades of grey, the trees and the way they all fit together that makes the subject. The subject is the image itself. I don't believe that a photograph has to have a subject in the sense of a building or a person; that is, a unique focus. Personally, I have always been very interested by the effect of low lights and mists, whether in the country or in town or anywhere else. That of course makes for a very different kind of landscape from, say, most of GeeBee's, but I would contest that it is a valid landscape nonetheless. My father was an abstract artist - which may offer some sort of context! Call this an attempt to achieve a similar thing in B&W, if you want. Best regards, Peter Peter Jim Hemenway wrote: > Peter: > > Please don't get angry with me but I don't see a subject. > > Jim > > Peter Dzwig wrote: > >> Before anyone asks, the objects about one third in from the left and a >> quater of the way down are actually natural effects, clouds actually. >> Sorry :-) >> >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/album347/MistyLandscapeHolmbury200612.jpg.html >> >> >> >> Leica M3 5cm Summicron Kodak BW400CN 1/500th at f11 >> >> Thanks for looking, >> >> Constructive comments are, as always, welcome. >> >> Peter Dzwig >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >