----- Original Message ----- From: "Claudio Bonavolta" <claudio@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 4:24 AM Subject: [pure-silver] Re: The Quest and My Heresy?? ----- Message d'origine ----- De: "Dana H. Myers" <dana.myers@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 02:11:49 -0800 Sujet: [pure-silver] Re: The Quest and My Heresy?? À: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<snip> I'm not sure there's anything sillier than debating that interesting images are always more interesting than boring images. Dana
Altough I completely agree on this, there are cases where it is the way the image is processed that makes it interesting. The japanese photographer mentionned by Adrienne is a good example: what would be the interest in these pictures without that particular processing ?
Claudio Bonavolta http://www.bonavolta.ch ====================================How its processed should not even be something that enters consideration of the viewer. They could care less. Is the image interesting, say something, make a powerful statement, trigger an emotional response, or any of a number of other WOW factors? If so the image works. If not it doesn't. A particular techinque almost never makes or breaks an image. You might like one with the techinque a little better than the other, and you might improve something with this or that, but for the most part its like make up on a beautiful woman. It just enhances the beauty thats already there. Put make up on an ugly woman and you still have an ugly woman.
============================================================================================================= To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.