What is "sheer beauty"? G
On Sep 13, 2007, at 12:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
