Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/02/24

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Misrepresentation
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 15:49:08 -0600
References: <CAH1UNJ1qRmuhRarEd8-dFUTK4_-i3QWez9k8+mv9mMsXTMhc_w@mail.gmail.com> <C6FCD9F6-2748-411F-B485-67A4B3EB886E@frozenlight.eu> <AB25FC23-4CFF-4F8B-9C0E-89844B7730E5@mac.com> <89D1411A-569D-4232-A6DE-B6997BAF09EA@bex.net> <CAF8hL-FeBGKYZTBjzO9kAa=PsBSAVmSnHhvL1w_1JseeiN-BSw@mail.gmail.com>
 
On Feb 24, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Richard Man wrote:

> I see this has been discussed. I like Mr. Pellegrin's response (finally). I
> do not see any malice, just unfortunate coincidence.
> https://nppa.org/node/36604
> 
> Comparing to the doctored "Best Landscapes" and the like photos, I do not
> think this ranks with those sorry stories.

He does seem to need to take better notes or simplify his captions.

This one also seems "wrong"
<http://www.magnumphotos.com/image/NYC125934.html>
in so far as the gun does not belong to Brett (not Breet).

If you're going to work in journalism and documentary
best not be this sloppy on the word end;
or be working with some very good assistants, and or word smiths.

Regards,
George Lottermoser 
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
Replies: Reply from tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca) ([Leica] Misrepresentation)
 In reply to: Message from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] Misrepresentation)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Misrepresentation)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Misrepresentation)
Message from hlritter at bex.net (Howard Ritter) ([Leica] Misrepresentation)
Message from richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Misrepresentation)