On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Daniel J. Matyola <[email protected]> wrote:
> In a recent thread, many sharply criticized one of the most famous > images of AA. Is HCB such a god that he is beyond criticism? I don't think that's really the issue here. Rather, I see two main points: (1) The commenters are oblivious to the fact that it's a famous photograph, showing a weakness in the commenters' understanding of the history of the art form they're critiquing. I see some merit to this argument, but, really, all of us have to decide where to focus our attention, and we all have strengths, weaknesses, and gaps in our knowledge. (2) Most of the complaints were about the technical quality, particularly sharpness. This illustrates a widespread belief, especially in this sort of Internet forum, that perfect technical quality is essential to a good photograph. If that's someone's well-considered belief, fine, but it seems like a lot of people hold this belief without really thinking about it, or without appreciating how many of photography's past works would be rejected under it. Today I was engaged in a discussion about whether the Nikon D700 and D800 are suitable for making large prints (in the sense of "Maybe the D800 is, but maybe not the D700.") My response was that if that kind of statement seems reasonable to you, you're saying there haven't been many adequate prints in the history of photography. It's a narrow technical view that, even I as a sensor and instrumentation geek, am getting weary of. I'm glad for the ever-increasing capabilities of our equipment, but at some point you need to just look at the picture! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
