[pure-silver] Re: The Quest and My Heresy??
- From: "Mark Blackwell" <mblackwell1958@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 08:57:24 -0600
----- 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.
Other related posts:
