Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/08/29

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

Subject: [Leica] Legs
From: lluisripollquerol at gmail.com (Lluis Ripoll Querol)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 01:40:49 +0200
References: <AANLkTi=+r+aAVfVDOY1CTgj-MCSfR8-uRiZO+RsuHBNh@mail.gmail.com> <20100829013554.2448957b@linux-wbgu.site> <66C05887-7D0F-4D2F-8AF9-07947A09061F@gmail.com> <20100829021523.5369025a@linux-wbgu.site> <5BA29308-0153-4D66-B38C-603825BFE287@mac.com> <20100829184918.5a32248e@linux-wbgu.site> <52026E27-35F3-4617-A3DF-96C9AE28AE7C@mac.com> <B2001CE1CD3742369E73287D03F7C8AB@syneticfeba505>

Thank you George and Dr. Ted, you made the point

Saludos
Lluis


El 30/08/2010, a las 1:33, <tedgrant at shaw.ca> escribi?:

> George Lottermoser offered:
>
>>> And another question,
> Does the photograph in question
> in any way illustrate, imply, or suggest
> a disrespect for this particular woman,
> or any other woman?
> ? not in my opinion ?
> In fact it implies appreciation - to me.<<<<<<<<
>
> Thank you George, absolutely right on the mark!
>
> cheers,
> ted
>
>
>
>
> " <imagist3 at mac.com>
> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
> Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 4:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Legs
>
>
> And this, as any, question can and will be answered
> by many different individuals, from many different cultures
> in many different ways.
>
> Another question could be asked as well.
> Does the subject of this photo (or any other woman)
> who wears skirts of this length, and sits at elevated bars,
> care if her legs are seen, appreciated and/or photographed?
>
> And another question,
> Does the photograph in question
> in any way illustrate, imply, or suggest
> a disrespect for this particular woman,
> or any other woman?
> ? not in my opinion ?
> In fact it implies appreciation - to me.
>
> obviously YMMV
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george at imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 29, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Phil wrote:
>
>> I'm not drawing a line at all. There are a lot of very good photos in
>> this album, this theme pops up a lot though. I mention faces because
>> there are a lot more backs of heads than faces featured.
>>
>> Here is an email I received from my friend Adrena about the photo and
>> others in question:
>>
>> "i think another important question with a photo that's going to get
>> this intimate is "what is the model's name? does the photographer  
>> know
>> the model's name?" i mean, the photo is just listed as "legs." i went
>> through some of his other shots and found another with exactly same
>> title that was clearly a different subject, and again, it was
>> something that i *really* hope was posed."
>>
>> That's the point of view of one of several women who have all said
>> essentially the same thing The question that I ask is if the woman's
>> perspective as the one being photographed is taken into account. Or
>> should it be? We shouldn't take opportunistic photos of the homeless
>> but this theme is ok? That's what I'm getting at, is all.
>>
>> Phil Forrest
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 11:42:28 -0500
>> George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You seem to assume that appreciation
>>> of the visual beauty of the human form
>>> and respect cannot or do not coexist.
>>>
>>> Some Muslims consider exposing
>>> and/or photographing a face in public
>>> offensive; and consider any "street" photography
>>> of women off limits.
>>>
>>> You draw a line that states, "if you photograph a woman
>>> in public you must include the face."
>>>
>>> These are subjective, personal and cultural considerations.
>>>
>>> You, of course, can draw this line
>>> for your own photographic practice;
>>> and viewing. And I respect your right to do so.
>>>
>>> Others will continue to step over it.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> George Lottermoser
>>> george at imagist.com
>>> http://www.imagist.com
>>> http://www.imagist.com/blog
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 29, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Phil wrote:
>>>
>>>> As in the past, I'm probably one of very few to speak up about
>>>> respect for women and how we portray them.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from pswango at att.net (Phil Swango) ([Leica] war is personal)
Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca) ([Leica] Legs)