Good pictures come in all shapes and sizes. Sometimes it's the compositon that makes a shot memorable. But a fascinating subject can achieve that as well. And of course sheer beauty is always worth a second look. In truth, there is no single, narrow definition. Paul -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Rebekah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > The question you posed is indeed "What is a good picture?" a sibling > > > to "What is art?" ... > > > > We haven't had this debate in at least a month. It's time... > > > > ;-) > > > :o) that, and "does a good subject make a good picture?" > > > rg2 > > On 9/13/07, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 9/13/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The question you posed is indeed "What is a good picture?" a sibling > > > to "What is art?" ... > > > > We haven't had this debate in at least a month. It's time... > > > > ;-) > > > > cheers, > > frank > > > > -- > > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > "the subject of a photograph is far less important than its composition" > > -- > 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
