On 6/28/2012 7:46 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
> PESO:
>
> Here is another from my stay with the Monueles family. Does Oscar peeking
> at me detract from the photo?
>
> http://www.pbase.com/image/144381856
>
> I am paying attention to all of your comments and editing everything
> according to suggestions.
You've asked much the same question several times. I think you wold be well
served by deciding what your images are, and
sticking to that.
If you see them as documentary, and think that shouldn't include explicit
subject acknowledgement of photographer, you
should leave all of those out.
My personal opinion is that one of your strengths as a photographer is in the
responses you elicit from your subjects.
'Twere me, I'd modify my definition, even lean more toward those with
responsive subjects.
Until Heisenberg, physicists liked to think that they could remain objective,
observe and measure without affecting. It
isn't true of atomic particles, and certainly not true with people.
Ethnologists used to pretend the same thing. As any sensible person could have
told them, that didn't work either. I'd
give up any such pretense as a photographer, too, if it were me.
Nobody but those playing at scientist want's to look at a bunch of
dispassionate recordings of everyday life. Your real
audience loves the humanity you elicit in your subjects. Been to those dioramas
of Indian life in a village? Dead. Your
photographs aren't.
Werner H. Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|