Infamy is in the eye of the beholderThen you may wish to rephrase your original observation - instead of "Lawyers are infamous" you might substitute "Lawyers are famous".
Pardon the parsing.

Infamy is in the eye of the beholderThen you may wish to rephrase your original observation - instead of "Lawyers are infamous" you might substitute "Lawyers are famous".
Pardon the parsing.
We often have discussions here on APUG/Photrio about what it means to make art, or be an artist.Infamy is in the eye of the beholderTo many people, the ability of attorneys to parse words is little short of the devil's work... I know it's a necessity of the job.
We often have discussions here on APUG/Photrio about what it means to make art, or be an artist.
I've seen analysis of the meaning of words that I swear reaches the status of art.
I think that part of what affects my perception of these things is my understanding of how very challenging it is to draft language in a way that is both incredibly precise, and sufficiently flexible to capture what it is intended to capture even when circumstances evolve.
Personally. I have a fascination with the challenges of legal drafting.
And my earlier background with the study of physics leads me to a fascination with the intersection of reality, the perception of reality, and the true complexity of the universe we live in.
So these threads that centre around arguments about words and reality are intriguing.
The following is is of course a graphic and not a photograph, but what would you say is the reality here:
![]()
But first you must answer these three questions...matt, i think you found the holy grail ...![]()
But first you must answer these three questions...
Matt: "...The following is of course a graphic and not a photograph, but what would you say is the reality here:"
I perceive varying amount of light coming from inside my computer screen in a pattern of black and white (no grays) within a rectangle.
I like “No” a lot
Hmm... I think the two are one.yikes ! not that red pill !
this one >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill_and_blue_pill
Yes but who has the Kool-Aid?Speaking of steel traps...that is how I picture my memory. Anything in there, stays there -- but it can get a bit mangled.
PS - not having seen the Matrix...at least not all at once...when John brought up the red pill, that was the first youtube query I put in. I knew enough to know where to look. Finding the use of the phrase by conservatives was a bonus. Instead of red or blue, these days it seems the choice is between the red pill, the blue pill, or the Kool-Aid.
Pick your flavor!Yes but who has the Kool-Aid?
![]()
Does this have to do with the old saying: "photographs don't lie but photographers do"? Photographs are 'supposed" to be whatever their makers intend for them to be. Popular thought, perhaps, once thought that photographs were reality but that seemed to have died with the advent of Digital and easier "post" processing, which the general public is certainly aware of....I don't think the general public cares anymore.... I hope I am wrong.....Regards!i guess the title says it all
is a photograph or photography ( generally speaking i don't care of the format, or language ( digital or analog )
supposed to be reality ?
personally i don't think it is, even though its said to be a "mirror" more like a mirror that whoever being the camera
controls the warp...
only in documentary photography; otherwise,definitely noti guess the title says it all
is a photograph or photography ( generally speaking i don't care of the format, or language ( digital or analog )
supposed to be reality ?
personally i don't think it is, even though its said to be a "mirror" more like a mirror that whoever being the camera
controls the warp...
Does this have to do with the old saying: "photographs don't lie but photographers do"? Photographs are 'supposed" to be whatever their makers intend for them to be. Popular thought, perhaps, once thought that photographs were reality but that seemed to have died with the advent of Digital and easier "post" processing, which the general public is certainly aware of....I don't think the general public cares anymore.... I hope I am wrong.....Regards!
wowYes but who has the Kool-Aid?
![]()
yup cause im guessing reality doesn't existSometimes photographers lie but a camera can never capture reality regardless of whether the photographer want to or not.
yup cause im guessing reality doesn't exist![]()
I don't know what you meant but when I started out I was naive to think that my photographs would look like real life. I tried and never could so I knew that it's simply impossible.
That is an interesting observation, I do not think I have heard the reality/subjectivity idea stated this way. But it makes a lot of sense. Perhaps this is at the root of the like/hate phenomenon you find across different viewers....Photography is a negotiated reality, not an absolute one.
I remember the miner's strikes, where protesting miners were lined up against the police with batons and riot shields. The BBC came under attack for filming from behind the police, making the miners look like aggressors. Some photographers were among the miners facing the police, giving the opposite impression. Both photographic positions were true, but gave a completely different impression of events. Those photographs and films would have been edited to represent different realities. A policeman bleeding from a headwound or an unarmed man or woman being beaten by a uniformed officer, both could be typical of events, or snapshots that said nothing about the wider story. Yet one of those might remain iconic of the 1980s strikes for a century or more.i know what you are saying .. basically the camera just records whats infront of it
but i think there is something else going on to be honest.
I remember the miner's strikes, where protesting miners were lined up against the police with batons and riot shields. The BBC came under attack for filming from behind the police, making the miners look like aggressors. Some photographers were among the miners facing the police, giving the opposite impression. Both photographic positions were true, but gave a completely different impression of events. Those photographs and films would have been edited to represent different realities. A policeman bleeding from a headwound or an unarmed man or woman being beaten by a uniformed officer, both could be typical of events, or snapshots that said nothing about the wider story. Yet one of those might remain iconic of the 1980s strikes for a century or more.
Landscape photography is no less capable of telling lies about place than photojournalism is about a news story.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY: ![]() |