Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/03/31

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

Subject: [Leica] What is truth: A photograph was/ is ?
From: daniel.ridings at edd.uio.no (Daniel Ridings)
Date: Thu Mar 31 03:34:12 2005
References: <fb.6e009d9f.2f7cbda7@aol.com> <424B6777.7030006@cox.net> <10af8dc7c62edb9b13f99e253a2190cd@pix-that-stimulate.com> <424BD114.6050801@cox.net>

Agreed, Steve. Agreed. Concerns a lot more too. Even journalists. Not 
necessarily the ones writing while they are practising their trade, but 
the editors who chose what is "important" and should be lifted up.

We see this quite a lot in the significance that Europeans place on news 
items compared to what CNN or AP or some of the other news channels put 
the focus on. I won't go in to it because it's not a debate I want to 
raise (specific items, that is), but the principle.

Daniel


Steve Barbour wrote:

> .... photography always ! reflects a point of view, therefore 
> manipulation, by the process of selection...cropping is done  ! that's 
> the nature of it !  ...
> ....  something is selected to be included, and other things are 
> selected to be excluded...
> 
> Steve

In reply to: Message from Afterswift at aol.com (Afterswift@aol.com) ([Leica] What is truth: A photograph was is)
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] What is truth: A photograph was is)
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] What is truth: A photograph was/ is ?)