My complaint would be that they're really not very good photos,
depressing or not.
Bob W wrote:
It's not their job to publish inspirational and joyful photos. The world is
awash with that type of photo. What it's short of is good hard news
photography.
The big news stories of the year have been the tsunami, hurricanes and so
on, so that's what you'd expect to feature. What would people have said
about balance if at the end of 2001 there had been nothing about the WTC
attacks?
--
Cheers,
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12 December 2005 17:15
To: pentax list
Subject: Re: Time Magazines Best Photos of the Year 2005
On 12/12/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
Depressing bunch of photos. I mean I know it's PJ stuff, but surely
they could have found some inspirational and joyful photos
to publish.
I agree entirely. I good set of pics is all about balance. No
balance here. There are some outstanding individual examples,
but as a set, they do not live up to the title they bare given Time.
Let's see Nat. Geo's set!
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
