Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Michael wrote: >It seems fruitless to attempt to establish the superiority of one medium over >another in terms of "emotional impact." >>>> Mike, here is an example of impact by both mediums of exactly the same incident. We have a still photo by Eddie Adams mentioned earlier of the VC being shot in the head and that there was also a TV crew taping the same thing. To put a perspective on "intimacy with long lenses" which this thread seems to have taken in a twist to ...."Motion and Still" intimacy. We all remember Eddie's picture. A still captured moment! Who'll forget it. But how many of you remember the TV intimacy "motion image", not just of the shooting, but the moments after, tape rolling as the man lay there dying with blood pumping 18 inches into the air out the hole in the skull? Oh you don't remember that intimate moment with emotional impact? <<<<<In fact, both stills and motion pictures are capable of evoking tremendous emotional responses >>>>>>>>> What we have here is an example of the "still photo moment of impact" creating tremendous emtion and the "TV moving moment of both impact and after effect" with equal intimacy and emtional impact. The only difference. ...."one captures the moment stopped for eternity and the other captures it in motion for eternity!" They have equal impact and intimacy! Which is the greater? This is for each to decide after viewing both at the same time. ted Ted Grant This is Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler. http://www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant