You have absolutely no need for asbestos suit. I'm stubborn about this, but not to the point where I start flaming you or others. I do respect your opinion, otherwise I would not bother asking for it, and I sure would not bother responding to it. But respect is one thing, total agreement is another.
I used street photography as an example of a genre that has a differnet set of predescribed conventions than bird photo. A genre with greater tolleranse towards blurrynes. By using it as an example I was suggesting that this photo was intended valued or devalueted outside the bird shots box. Without the predescribed convention of the bird genre. Simply as a photograph. I guess I was emplying that the vocabulary you used suggested that you evaluated the photo inside the bird box. I don't know if my asumtion was correct or not, but that was how I read you. If you say that I was wrong about that, then I was wrong. You are the one who knows this. And I had absolutely no intention emplying that you are a one dimentional bird guy. I know that you do appreciate other genres. So I don't need to ask anybody. BTW. I suck at street photo too. Mainly because I don't have enough cohones. Our opinion differ on this. But that's cool. Because that means that we can have a meaningful discussion about it. I don't argue to convinse you that the Heavy Weather series is the best idea since sliced bread. I argue because thats how I learn. You are also more than welcome to come to "my" shoreline and shoot next to me, or/and just hang out together. I would concider it as a privilidge, and a great opportunity to really learn more about a genre you master extremely well. Tim Typo Mostly Harmless ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 5:55 PM Subject: Re: How to improve this shot? (Heavy Weather 2) > Hey, Tim. Based on your "rant" and "semi rant" it would seem that you > are totally emotionally attached to this photo and because of that I > will not comment further on it or other parts of this series. > > To me, as part of offering an image to the public for critique, letting > go of your feelings and looking at it objectively is important. I don't > get emotionally attached to any of the pictures I request critique on. > It makes it soooo much easier to send them to the bit bucket when they > don't work and doesn't hurt when someone tells me it's crap (for the > record I've never called anyone's images crap but my own). The ONLY > pictures I get emotional about are pictures of my kids and family. Of > course, I don't offer those for critique unless I think something is > artfully done or whatever. But in that case, I'm taking the critique on > the artistry, not the subject. I'm not saying being emotional about a > subject has no place in this. No, on the contrary, having a passion for > a subject, genre, or style is very important in creating good images. > I just don't get attached to the images after the shutter is closed. > > Now, let's answer a questions you posed to me: > > > I'm a bit curious: Let us say that this was a street photography. > Some > guys > > lighting a sigarette, at a rainy windy evening. Would you then have > > responded saying this is not good photography because it is out fokus? > > No, and my record will show that I don't think critical focus is > neccessary in this genre. Ask frank or godders or ann or Paul (but > mostly frank :-) ). I've responded positively to many of their images > (and others) that weren't super sharp. Because those pictures didn't > need to be in my opinion. In other genres (architecture, landscape and > static animals) I expect SOMETHING to be in focus. > > > I can imagine you saying you don't like it. But that's another thing. > > Ok... what's that supposed to mean? That I'm a one-dimensional bird > guy and can't appreciate other subjects and styles? I personally suck > at street photography and don't "get" it sometimes, but I can appreciate > these images when I see something that appeals to me. > > > One more thing. I can't go back to reshoot. At least not until next > year. It > > is very unlikely I will have similar weather condition and the same > birds > > there until next march. And if those who wants to "devellop the area" > gets > > their way. Then the birds will not be there at all. This windy shore > will be > > history. > > I'm sorry to hear that. You seem like a nice guy, Tim, and one day I > hope to visit the ol' home country again and shoot some birds with you, > maybe on that rocky, wind-wept shore. > > (asbestos suit: check!) :-) > > -- > > Christian (mostly Norwegian) > http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
