Taste an quality IMO. Most opera librettos are pretty bad, if you read the translation, and in those cases I'm happy that I don't understand Italian ;-)
And this BTW, is a rather good analogy to titles getting in the way of the photo. For me, it is all about if the photographer is good at making titles. If the title is bad, it gets in the way, if it's good it often adds another dimension to the photography. Some photos need this extra dimension, and some don't. But from my point of view this has nothing to do about quality of the photo itself, it's about different genres and styles. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mike wilson Sent: 21. februar 2007 09:51 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Let's talk about titles > > From: Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2007/02/21 Wed AM 01:13:16 GMT > To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: Let's talk about titles > > What do you think about Dylan #47 compared to Dylan #165? > > Personally I prefer ballads without words. The words seem to interfere with > my freedom to interpret the music as I like. > > This may seem just stupid jokes. But that's not my intention. I'm trying to > make the point that some music goes best without words, and some don't. And > to me, it's the same with photography. It's definitely about taste. For me, most opera is best without words. > > This may seem obvious, but parts of this debate seem to ignore this, or tend > to say that photo without titles are better photography. I tend to disagree. > In fact I find it a rather pompous attitude. > > Just in case: I don't think that you John has this attitude; you simply gave > me the perfect opportunity to say this ;-) > > > Tim > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
