Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/09

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] RE: Eric's site & the LUG Gestapo
From: ted grant <75501.3002@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 20:43:11 -0400

Stephen Gandy wrote:

<<<<There was only one question that mattered in evaluating a shot "Do You
Like it or Not?>>>>>>

Stephen,

And that is always the bottom line with all photographs! A viewer either
likes it or they don't! Period! And the equipment means diddly squat!:) 

Like KISS....."keep it simple stupid!" That is the ultimate answer to "Do
you like it or not!" _____Yes or no.______

We all have seen photographs we thought were pretty grim only to find that 
many others thought it was great! So who is right or wrong? Me because I
"didn't like it?" or those who "I liked it?"

We have all seen photographs made "brilliant" only due to the wordsmiths
captions of how wonderful it is and how talented the photographer is etc.
Only to make our own judgment, "I still don't like it!" 

And if we are not asked why we don't like it, we need not make anything up
to qualify our feelings. However, if asked, one should be honorable and
experienced enough to make an honest appraisal of the work to explain their
reason for, "I don't like it!" or "I like it!"

In either case "like or dislike", we should be able to explain ourselves
without those disagreeing, jump up and down on the commentator for his or
her feelings.

What I have learned about pictures on web pages is the really great ones
look very very good! And the not so great ones can be made to look "hey
isn't that great!" Is it possible to make a truly honest "like or dislike"
assessment of a photograph shown on a web page? Probably, but?

Now remember, there are all kinds of influences coming into play here, many
of which I have no understanding of from a technical point. But as I
understand there are many factors from the electronic aspect which makes or
breaks the "true value of the image!" The monitor size; the colour balance
of the monitor; how well it was scanned into the computer, how well it was
downloaded or whatever; the scanner; how big the the image was recorded as,
to name a few. And I bet there are dozens of other influences many of my
more learned colleges can add.

I think we should all keep in mind that when critiquing a web photograph,
one should always make allowances for the quality of the computer image
instead of imagining we are looking at a real life article.

Certainly where colour comes into play! 

ted