Thanks for the insight, Paul. Very interesting! Cotty
>I haven't been following this thread, but Ann's response to Cotty has drawn >me in. > >If you had asked me a month ago, I would have sided with the curmudgeons >who say a portrait must include a person. I say "include," and not "be >chiefly composed of," because no one who has seen the arresting portrait of >the famous pianist at the very edge of a photo of his piano could doubt >that it is a consummate portrait. (The names of the pianist, the >photographer, and the piano escape me. Anyone?) > >At any rate, Ann's response, as well as others I've glimpsed, have >broadened my understanding of what a portrait can be. A closeup of the >clasped wrinkled hands of a long-married couple? You bet. An animal? >Absolutely. A shadow? If it showed a barber at work, yes. A shadow of an >animal? If it showed a cat pouncing at its prey--at work, as it were. (For >that matter, sleeping would qualify for a cat.) > >At the recent Bat Mitzvah dance, I took a photo of the shoes that the >13-year-old girls had doffed in close, haphazard formation before racing to >the dance floor. I regret not taking a floor-level shot of their dancing >feet. Would these have counted as portraits? In my book, yes. As Forrest >Gump remarked, "My momma always said, 'You can tell a lot about a person by >the shoes they wear.'" _______________________________________________________ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
