Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/12/23

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

Subject: [Leica] Interesting
From: s.dimitrov at charter.net (slobodan dimitrov)
Date: Sun Dec 23 16:05:13 2007
References: <AEE3EE03-5FBD-4665-A9A4-CAB848AAD9B9@pandora.be>

Ah yes, Peter Plagens!
I wonder if he personally choose the image used to intro the piece,  
Cindy Sherman?
Cindy Sherman is not representative in this place of ours where we  
create images by the use of a photographic medium. Most of what's  
taking place within photography is never intended for the gallery  
wall. And it does not seek to impose some version of a pretentious  
disassociated irony.
Going over his past word bites on photography, Plagens barely knows  
photography. The article is just a basic rework of what's been said  
before, notably by John Szarkowski.
Confusing the role tools play in conveying narrative, and its  
implications in the 'adherence to truth' is a common blunder by non- 
practitioners. I wonder as to just how content is now foundationaly  
altered when it is based on pixels?
s.d


On Dec 22, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Philippe Orlent wrote:

http://www.yourshot.eu/blog/2007/12/is_photography_dead.html

I don't entirely agree though.
Many will, I expect.

Philippe

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] Interesting)
In reply to: Message from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] Interesting)