From: Rod Fleming (rodfleming@sol.co.uk)
Date: 11/04/00-05:04:29 AM Z
Marc, the fact is that there is a good deal of non-technical, aesthetic
discussion on this list. You don't have to read the threads you don't want
to, and the list moderator is not shy to step in if things get out of hand.
Indeed there has been a good deal of support amongst list members for
non-tech threads.
So as far as I am concerned the answer- to your request that all those who
from time to time indulge in discussion non-technical subject areas should
go elsewhere- is "no, I won't". Sorry.
Rod
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc Gommé" <marc.gomme@pandora.be>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 10:40 AM
Subject: RE: photo history lecture
>
> To all those who like this chatting about "what is important and has great
> value for Ph."... please start another place for this subject ... till now
I
> got a lot of technical information about alt. phot. processes ... I hope
> there more like that in the future ...
>
> Marc (Belgium)
>
>
> >>C'mon, folks. To include Mapplethorpe in a list of the 5 photographers
> that
> >>affected the medium to the greatest degree? That's just silly, and an
> >>insult to Gene Smith, Robert Frank, Diane Arbus, etc. THESE are the
> artists
> >>that ought to be spoken of, if one has to present a "capsule summary".
>
> Agreed. Remember, we are talking about a list of just 5 people. You can
> create such a list, but you run the risk of leaving someone out that is
> important. Read and history of photography and you will discover that you
> recognize lots of the names. Trying to winnow a list that big to 5 is
> hard. I wish you luck. Post your finalists as soon as you have a list. I
> would be very interested.
>
> Bob
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/01/00-11:46:55 AM Z CST