In a message dated 98-11-10 20:15:24 EST, Gbouff@aol.com writes:
> Having once been an avid photograher ( but more than likely I'm jealous
> because of my inability to paint) I think that Mr. James should share some
> of
> the credit with the photographer, Simon Clay. My wife and I have this
> arguement quite often, as she was an illustrater and used to teach
painting.
Gary,
As a photographer myself, I agree with you totally. As a matter of fact, not
too many years ago, a photographer sued an artist for copyright infringment
for using his photo as a basis for a painting (for a commercial illustration,
I believe). If I remember correctly, the case went all the way to the supreme
court. It went at least to a federal appeals court and the photographer won.
Far too many people assume that if you used a machine (camera) to make the
picture, it isn't really art, and anyone with a good camera could have made
the picture. Too little credit is given to the artistic ability of the
photographer.
The new cameras, with all the auto focus, auto exposure, auto everything, have
made it easy to make "technically correct" pictures, but it's as hard as ever
to make "good" pictures. There is still the ART factor involved.
Dan Masters,
Alcoa, TN
'71 TR6---------3000mile/year driver, fully restored
'71 TR6---------undergoing full restoration and Ford 5.0 V8 insertion - see:
http://www.sky.net/~boballen/mg/Masters/index.html
'74 MGBGT---3000mile/year driver, original condition - slated for a V8 soon
'68 MGBGT---organ donor for the '74
|