Tom C wrote:
>I'm being cranky... :-) > Now you tell me... > I realized it was probably known. > oh sure.... hehe >My reason for making the comment was that I tend to think if one enjoys the >photo, then setup or not, one can still enjoy the photo, it being a product >of the photographer's eye and mind. > Except that, I think, it was kinda put forth as being spontaneous and not til later was it discovered/discussed that it wasn't. It may have been a sent up after seeing it happen and not being able to capture it, but I think she was there working with a model for some other reason - again, I'm fuzzy on this.. I know the whole story is around somewhere. >In landscape photography, one doesn't always simply happen upon the scene >and shoot it because one is there. As you know, one may go back to the same >spot many times, observing the light, fine-tuning the composition, choosing >one kind of weather over another. In many ways analogous to setting up a >street scene. > >Tom C. > > Actually, most landscape photography for me has been done on the fly - although I might have sat and waited for an hour or two in rare instances, most of the time I was not able to do that. Most of the time I was shooting it was a case of yelping "stop" to my partner who was driving when I saw something I wanted to grab. :) ann > > > > >>From: ann sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>Subject: Re: American girl in Italy by Ruth Orkin >>Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:50:01 -0500 >> >>But but the answer is known, Tom.... >> >>When I said "I believe" I simply meant "to the best of my recollection" >> it is documented somewhere, >>elaborately. >> >>ann >> >>Tom C wrote: >> >> >> >>>My question to all of you is, assuming the answer is unknown, how can you >>>tell? >>> >>> >>>Tom C. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>From: ann sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>>Subject: Re: American girl in Italy by Ruth Orkin >>>>Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 13:10:04 -0500 >>>> >>>>I think semi contrived... >>>>I believe she set up and had the girl walk by.. but the guys on the >>>>street were not in on it entirely... >>>>Too bad it was even set up to that extent . >>>> >>>>BTW - If any of you ever see a photo of Orkin's of a guy in swimming >>>>trunks leaping into the >>>>air to grab a frisbee - shot in Central Park about um 30 years ago, (in >>>>a book?on line?) >>>>let me know. >>>> >>>>ann >>>> >>>> >>>>William Robb wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>----- Original Message ----- >>>>>From: "Jens Bladt" Subject: OT: American girl in Italy by Ruth Orkin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>What is the truth about "American Girl in Italy", which is one of my >>>>>> >>>>>> >>all >> >> >>>>>>time favorite photogarphs? >>>>>> >>>>>>The New York Times, Sunday April 30, 1995 >>>>>>Candid or Contrived? The Making of a Classic by Shaun Considine >>>>>> >>>>>>Some of you may know? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>Contrived. >>>>> >>>>>William Robb >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>-- >>>>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>[email protected] >>>>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>-- >>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>[email protected] >>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> > > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
