I was thinking of replying to Brian's message that he was making a good
point. I have the same urge now with yours Bill. Guess we need a bit of
both. I think in some ways the more constrained themes might make for a
more interesting exhibition, as part of the subject is more narrowly
defined, making for a more unified whole (Doro's manhole pics work
better as a set than individually to my mind). There is still plenty of
latitude for inclusion of secondary subject matter, etc, so the theme
does not need to be a technically led challenge.
James
On 21 Nov 2003, at 11:23, NSURIT@xxxxxxx wrote:
In a message dated 11/21/2003 2:27:55 AM Central Standard Time,
bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
If we had a few TOPEs with subjects such as Manhole covers (Doro !!),
fences, gates, doors, beaches, puddles, hands, outdoor markets,
sunsets,
and bark of trees, we would have themed exhibitions with a unity that
might
encourage even more development of technique to make each image stand
out from the crowd..
It's fun as well to have TOPEs that are capable of wide
interpretation, but I for
one would appreciate a few tightly defined topics
In my opinion, photography is somewhat like a two-way mirror. It
reflects an image which the photographer felt was interesting or
important to capture. It also allows the viewer to look back through
the lens and see part of the soul or essence of the person who
captured the image.
Assuming there is some truth in my assessment of photography (and it
is certainly that for me) then I say that the broader the latitude for
interpretation of the category the more likely we are to see the
essence of the person behind the lens. I like that.
One of the categories I had suggested was "Places of Worship". There
are many beautiful buildings built for that purpose and the
photographs made of them often are ones that many will immediately
connect with on a visceral level. Although I happen to be a regular
church attender, my interpretation would likely not be that of some
man made structure which was designed to be used for worship. It
would more likely be a photograph which captures the beauty in the
Universe and with which I find myself more connected with spirit. This
being an example of interpretation of a somewhat broad theme.
In my opinion, the tighter the category, the more likely you may
see technique and the less of the soul of the image maker. That is
not to say technique is not important, as it is, however I would
rather my photographs say, "This is who I am" rather than "This is
what I did". Generally, I like for technique to be transparent.
So count my vote as one for broader topics although I wouldn't want us
to not have topics that are tighter. I get more excited about
"reflections" (which can be interpreted in many ways, more than one of
which could be included in one's image) than perhaps a topic such as
"manhole covers".
My 2 cents and then some. Bill Barber
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|