Derivative... what does that mean? That it is a tight composition derived
from a larger whole? Sure, and done deliberately. That's a compositional
tool. Umm, what photo is not a derivative?
Poor tonal quality? What does that mean? What is one often shooting (as
well as seeing) through when capturing a rainbow? Rain and mist which all
tend to diffuse the scene and lower contrast somewhat. I think this does a
decent job of capturing the scene through the viewfinder.
Mediocre composition? Maybe, maybe not. I haven't exactly decided myself
on that. I personally like it better than any rainbows I've captured since
living here five years. When a rainbow appears it dosen't last forever and
the opportunity to change vantage point is pretty much limited to where one
can go before it fades.
Furthermore, I would suggest that my 'derisive attitude' has no bearing on
the merits or perceived quality of my own photographs. If you're judging my
photo based on something I said, you're not the photo.
The parenthetical title of my photo was not meant to be derisive... maybe
that's what Paul was referring to as tongue-in-cheek. In that case he's
correct. It's a photo from my street and that's all I intended to convey.
Tom C.
From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: PESO - Splittin Image (My Street Shot)
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 18:40:16 -0700
Derivative, poor tonality, mediocre composition. These things, coupled
with a derisive attitude about a type of photography that, because you
neither like nor understand it, lessens the value of your image and puts it
more into the realm of a sarcastic comment than a photo intended to stand
on its own merits.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Christian
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom C"
> > Taken a week ago from the top of the driveway.
> >
> > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3616155
> >
>
> Now THAT'S "street photography"!!!
