Which is more important?

Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?

=?iso-8859-1?Q?TheDave=A9?=

Re: Which is more important?

Yep. His idea is just as silly as saying that only art is
photography... ;-)
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com

Floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)

Re: Which is more important?

You are mistaken.
How about "artistic photography" too, if (and only if) that is
the proper qualifier?
Perhaps what you meant to say is that he also did photography
that would be considered "art"?
Do you realize that some professional artists do non-work
related photography that is documentation? ;-)
From WordNet (r) 2.0[wn]:
photography
n 1: the act of taking and printing photographs [syn: picture
taking]
2: the process of producing images of objects on photosensitive
surfaces
3: the occupation of taking and printing photographs or making
movies
See the problem? Your definition of photography is, ahem, unique.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com

Floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)

Re: Which is more important?

Mikey, you were wrong about this before.
you are wrong about it now.
you will continue, no doubt, to be wrong about it in the future.

Alan Browne

Re: Which is more important?

Not in the context of this NG which is decidedly not forensics, evidence
gathering or crime scene documentation.
Don't be petulant. There is no "mistake" in being paid in a profession.
Just don't call it photography without a qualifier such as "police
photography" or "evidence photography" or whatever you qualified it to be.
And I'm sure that you did non work related photography for the pleasure
of making images that would be considered "photography" without the
qualifier.
There's a difference. Sports photography is for a cultural purpose and
for that matter can include fine art in the right circumstances.
Documenting crime scenes is documentation. Once upon a time they used
film cameras to decide which horse won the race ... that's not sports
photography, that's measurement. Much like police scene photography is
documentation to support the investigation and the prosecution.
Cheers,
Alan
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Alan Browne

Re: Which is more important?

That's why we get to have rebuttal and argument and explanation (usually
repetitive) and ...... housework never gets done... never mind actual
photography (hmm, the light out there is quite nice, maybe around 3:30).
<snipped>
First impressions in reading: once you read it one way, it's hard to
read it another way...
Cheers,
Alan
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Alan Browne

Re: Which is more important?

HCB's gift was that he had a great eye. Capa had huge balls.
It's hard to pay much attention to attaining critical sharpness when
bombs are blowing up all over and people are shooting at you. I'm
always more impressed with people like Capa or Nachtwey who shoot on
the run than technicians like Adams who do most of their work in the
darkroom.
I think one way photography has changed is that many folks now spend
more time processing their pics than they do shooting them. I'm guilty
of this myself.
HCB and Capa would fall into one side of this while Adams would be on
the other.

Annika1980

Re: Which is more important?

That is completely untrue. Ansel Adams was a full-service commercial
photographer. He shot architectural, social and product subjects in
addition to his exquisite landscape photography.
There are very, very few photographers of Adams' stature who shot such
a wide range of subjects.
As for his technique, he used the right tools for the job, and much of
his non-landscape work was shot on 120 roll film - and in those days,
that was considered a small format.
I find a lot if inspiration in Adams' sheer all-round ability across a
wide variety of genres and equipment. He was most certainly *not* a
one-trick pony.

Tony Polson

Re: Which is more important?

If you had to put all the elements in the picture, especially in a
single frame so that there'd be context, then composition *was*
important.
It's like when you're browing for used lenses on ebay: If someone has a
picture of a lens that leaves out the writing around the front, they
didn't compose their picture properly. A compositional failure that
results in a useless image.

Usenet@mile23.c0m (Paul Mitchum)

Re: Which is more important?

[..]
<http://www.grand-illusions.com/vermeer/vermeer1.htm>