No way to control this, I know, but I suspect it would
be revealing if there were some way to control image
critiques, wherein any who would care to, would rate
or grade an image prior to reading what others think.
Suspect there would be much guessing as to how others
might rate it. The real problem, of course, would be
the association of a name with the rating.
Jack
--- Powell Hargrave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Marco Alpert"
> >
> >> Frankly, it seems to me that there are some of
> the unsual assumptions
> >> here about what exactly constitutes "fine art"
> photography (as a
> >> category - quality evaluations aside). Whose idea
> of "fine" art? As
> >> opposed to what other kind of art? (This kind of
> bugs me in the same
> >> way all those articles and workshops about
> "Mastering the Fine Print"
> >> used to bug me. "Fine Print" seemed to be code
> for "like Ansel Adams or
> >> John Sexton or Howard Bond" or whomever, with the
> annoying presumption
> >> that anything else was therefore less than
> "Fine.") To respond to
> >> something Tom C asked in another message, no, I
> don't believe that the
> >> subjectivity of a majority = objectivity of a
> sort.
> >
> >
> >Is an apple better than an orange?
> >Would you change your answer if the apple was
> rotten?
> >
> >William Robb
>
>
> There are many 'Fine Art' renditions of rotten
> apples.
>
> Powell
>
>
>
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
