[Leica] What are the most important aspects of a photographic image?

[imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)]

On Jan 4, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Steve Barbour wrote:

> I don't think this is true George....clearly color should be used, "if 
> it's about color" but "if the image depends on color (only) to make its 
> impact, then it's largely lost"...
> is this not basically correct?  If it's not correct, why?

I see the history of visual art as much too vast and complex to break it 
down into:
1) color should be used "if it's about color."
2) "if the image depends on color (only) to make its impact, then it's 
largely lost."

I have a difficult time imagining this subject in terms of:
a) correct b) incorrect
followed by an essay question.

I believe we could find many examples
of fine strong color photographs, (paintings, and prints)
and indeed entire bodies of color work
which "are about" far more than just the color;
yet which use color as a significant element in the overall visual message.

Further - yes - some artwork (photographs included) does depend on color to 
make its impact;
and for me that's just fine; I don't see "it" as "largely lost;" I can enjoy 
artwork "about" color
just as I enjoy artwork about expressionism, abstraction, social 
documentary, observations of irony, etc.

Under all this analysis, slicing and dicing we come down to:
Does the picture(s) work:
as a piece of art?
as a piece of craft?
as a significant document?
as a useful document?
as a news item?
as a beautiful object?
as a moving body of work?
as an innovative image or body of work?
as entertainment?
as educational?
to move the genre forward in the history of an art or craft?
to present a fresh point of view?
to expand our understanding of a subject?
Is it the best, among the best, pretty good, okay, sub par, mediocre, etc?

and each will have a slightly different opinion on those questions.

Regards,
George Lottermoser 
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist