Ender100@aol.com
Date: 08/19/02-08:21:11 PM Z
Shannon,
I totally agree... and maybe it sounds like I am contradicting my earlier
post about not trying to emulate the masters (it might be a good exercise to
see how your work compares though) .... however I don't buy the "it's already
been done" argument. To a certain extent, I think many people go through and
evolution and need to try to do their own version of peppers, pears in a
wooden bowl, etc.... and who's to say they won't come up with their own
version or image that is even better..... even hairy legs might be
interesting as long as you are politically correct and super glue their knees
together.
A good friend of mine who is lurking on this list told me once "never tell
someone that they picked the wrong subject to photograph."...right Sam?
hehehehehe I think he mentioned someone once said that to him... but I still
remember him saying that to me. Once you censor people and make a topic off
limits, then you have destroyed their ability to explore and learn and grow.
What knowledge is that dangerous?
Mark Nelson
In a message dated 8/19/02 6:10:17 PM, shannonstoney@earthlink.net writes:
<< I think there is something to this point about training. Maybe in art,
"ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny," just as in biology. (Pardon my invented
spelling.) That is, the life of the individual photographer sometimes has
to recapitulate the history of the medium in order to get to something new.
So, right now I'm at about 1925, I think. I am thinking about making some
less fuzzy images on silver gelatin paper!! How bout that!! Revolutionary,
huh? I might even take me some pictures of nekkid ladies with hairy legs.
And I might let some public hair show. >>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:02:49 AM Z CST