Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/02/13

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Is Photography Real...
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:39:43 -0500
References: <B6AF3C63.3B3%howard.390@osu.edu>

  To arbitrarily select the dimension of "literalness"
> as a catagorisation basis and claim that it -- somehow -- carries greater
> epistemological validity than any other arbitrairily chosen dimension is
> just academic codswallop.
> 
> M.
> 
Can't disagree with that, Martin, even from my high perch up here above
the clouds...;-)...I was more interested in the general question, and
was thinking back to wazername the pedantic would-be-intellectual and
her observations about the lack of "accuracy" if you will in
photographs.

The Picasso thing is amusing, but makes a point - even the most accurate
photograph of a person or event leaves out more than it includes, and
therefore is a slice of something, but is not a whole, accurate, picture
of that something...Just my Godly two cents worth.:-)

TLFKAG

In reply to: Message from Martin Howard <howard.390@osu.edu> (Re: [Leica] Is Photography Real...)