Fernando wrote: >Coming back to conceptual photography, to me the problem is that >for being photography, there are way too many words involved...
Not just "conceptual photography". A couple of months ago I went to an exhibit of every Pulitzer Prize-winning photograph in the history of the award. As a kind of thought experiment, I went through the entire exhibit without reading any of the captions or accompanying information. A great many of them weren't very good photographs, in and of themselves. Now I have to stress that I'm not intending this as criticism in the context of photojournalism. News photographs have to be *about* something to be valuable as news photographs. But my personal taste runs to photographs that don't require any "meta data" to work. (I should also mention that many of them succeeded spectacularly without any outside information.) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
