On 8/5/07, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed: >What? Is Godfrey in a 3rd grade photography? :-) Sorry to appear rude. > >What is good about this picture? I don't find anything appealing about it. >I don't see that it took any more effort than haphazardly raising the camera >to one's eye and pressing the shutter release, maybe not even looking >through the viewfinder. > >Not only is the main subject not in clear focus, the secondary subject is >not either, and both are cut off. I'm not a believer that some sort of >unspoken social commentary, makes a photograph a good photograph. > >If this is the kind of image that constitutes an incredible photograph, then >by God, every person that ever picked up a camera and pressed the shutter >release a half dozen times is a good photographer, and we should all stop >trying.
I think there's one thing you missed Tomas (sic) It's not just all of the above, but the decision as to how that frame actually is presented as the finished piece. The actual frame chosen, the composition decided upon, possibly post-production, the rendering - how it was printed (in old fashioned speak). That's all a cognitive process beyond just snapping the pic as you intimate. To me, a photograph - any photograph - is more than just what was recorded in front of the lens. To me, it's about what the viewer *feels* when looking at the image. It's about the emotions that one recalls, about one's own experiences, and how that relates to what the photographer has presented. We've all walked past a homeless lady with a dog at some point in our lives, and we all react differently. What makes the shot more than just a fuzzy grab to me is that the image presented by Godfrey conveys what I feel when I walk past a scene like that - slightly blurry because I steal a glance, only recalling the vital elements of the scene - the head, the blanket, the dog. That's all i wanted to see, otherwise I would have gone back and looked harder, looked longer. To me, Godfrey's photograph has captured beautifully the essence of the scene he saw, and turned it into something that I can relate to, and that's the whole point of the exercise. I would go so far as to compare Godfrey's pic to Robert Frank. I look through The Americans and I see echoes of it, and vice versa. Of course, Godfrey is exploring a style here, and Jimminy Cricket, it works for me. Look at Juan Buhler's work and see something else, yet also that works conveys emotions and feelings, and I see fabulous things there, I'm sure a lot of folk on the list do. Can I just end by going over your last para again: >If this is the kind of image that constitutes an incredible photograph, then >by God, every person that ever picked up a camera and pressed the shutter >release a half dozen times is a good photographer, and we should all stop >trying. I wouldn't describe it as incredible, but totally credible yes. I would describe it as indicative of what I feel when in proximity to such a scene, and as a standalone piece of work I think it excels beautifully. As such, i wouldn't consider hanging up my cameras just yet. In fact, it's a pic like this that inspires me to go out and try and convey a scene that I know of - try and present something that I like to look at, and maybe someone else will like it too. HTH best, -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
