back alley
IMAGES
kevin m said:
Definition:
excessive: going beyond what is healthy, moral, appropriate, or socially acceptable...
i don't see it myself.
bmattock
Mentor
back alley said:
Sorry, I have been in and out all afternoon, did not see any threads being deleted.
MartinP
Mentor
Back-Alley has the job of pro-actively (in the ideal case) preventing problems in this place, and he is right - we have left the photographic area to a large extent.
I do think there is an interesting discussion to be had on the production of photo-journalism versus "Art", and why both things may overlap, or be separate, depending on where we happen to be looking from. We have left that area a bit, sorry about that.
The discussion doesn't have many participants, the evening is approaching (or is here, in this neck of the woods) so perhaps it will quietly go to sleep. I do understand that it could be prudent to close the thread before too many less reasonable posts turn up though - otherwise it may spoil the RFF atmosphere. Sad but possible.
I do think there is an interesting discussion to be had on the production of photo-journalism versus "Art", and why both things may overlap, or be separate, depending on where we happen to be looking from. We have left that area a bit, sorry about that.
The discussion doesn't have many participants, the evening is approaching (or is here, in this neck of the woods) so perhaps it will quietly go to sleep. I do understand that it could be prudent to close the thread before too many less reasonable posts turn up though - otherwise it may spoil the RFF atmosphere. Sad but possible.
parsec1
parsec1
Bin Laden is/was a multi millionaire so was Saddam. Whats it cost to buy a merchant ship fill it full of 'nasty stuff' and sail it near enough to New York to throw civililisation as we know it back 200 years. Some lowly Iraqi General had $80,000000 cash in a secret compartment in an outhouse. There are plenty who would have mastered such a venture for a lot less some even for nothing but religeious ferver. Is it a chance worth taking?
Unless ofcourseyou fancy yourself as a Hobbit.
Unless ofcourseyou fancy yourself as a Hobbit.
MartinP
Mentor
I suppose parsec1 is a pseudonym for someone else, taking the p*** after my last post, but he made me laugh anyway.
It might be a hint for the mods . . . .
It might be a hint for the mods . . . .
BillP
Rangefinder General
parsec1 said:
I'd be a hard Hobbit to break
Regards,
Bill
BillP
Rangefinder General
Seriously, the thought that is in my mind when people debate after the event the "political intent" of one image or the other is if that in fact was the photographer's intent when they captured the image. As we know, in Capa's case, it is hard to separate his political polarisation from his photographic output at times.
It is sometimes the politicians that make it "political" - Margaret Thatcher famously refused accreditation for Don McCullin to sail with the Falklands Task Force because she feared his ability to present war in - literally - black and white would sap the will of the British people to carry the fight to the Argentine.
What I cannot imagine in this case (for those who remember where we started) is that the photographer actually thought "Here's one for the Democrats" when he pressed the shutter release.
Regards,
Bill
It is sometimes the politicians that make it "political" - Margaret Thatcher famously refused accreditation for Don McCullin to sail with the Falklands Task Force because she feared his ability to present war in - literally - black and white would sap the will of the British people to carry the fight to the Argentine.
What I cannot imagine in this case (for those who remember where we started) is that the photographer actually thought "Here's one for the Democrats" when he pressed the shutter release.
Regards,
Bill
lewis44
Well-known
Being a Vietnam Vet, all I can say is this is Deja Vu, all over again.
Randy
Randy
R
ruben
Guest
back alley said:
In my opinion there is an interesting relationship between the pictures and the unfolding worldwide debate.
This relatioship was somehow insinuated by brachal who posted the best commentary, better than mine too:
"I appreciated the photos; I thought most of them were very well done.
I think the photojournalist serves a very valuable role by reminding us what war is -- regardless of the side or politics. It doesn't matter whether it's Gettysburg, the Somme, Iwo Jima, Chosin, Saigon, Afghanistan, or someplace you've never heard of. It doesn't matter why you're fighting. Inevitably innocent people are hurt and killed. Nobody comes through unchanged. Some things are worth fighting for, but we should never forget that there is always a terrible price to be paid."
I think this reflects very accurately what the photographer did. Our unfolding debate shows how successfull the photographer was in limiting himself to the most basic, as brachal pointed.
Cheers,
Ruben
kshapero
South Florida Man
sitemistic said:
I believe you are very ill informed. The present US administration wishes to establish a democracy in Iraq for which they must be seen as naive and foolish. But there has never been any evidence of the present adminstration trying to make Iraq into a Christian nation. Statements like that are at best irresponsible.
go find another forum to finish this discussion gents.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.