luis <chilled_delirium@mailstation.com> writes: > >Ah. Perhaps you misunderstand. > > Perhaps I do. I'm sorry, Luis, but my original comment was tongue-in-cheek, and I'm a bit astonished that you don't just accept it as such. Remember the first thing I said: "Read John Shaw's 'Closeups in Nature'." > Please correct me if I am still misunderstanding you...but it seems > as if you are saying that your reaction to Shaw's imagery is awe, > and that awe causes, to use your own word, to feel "dejected" ? > Why ? I think reactions to mastery of anything are bound to be a bit mixed, at least if you are the sort of person who wants to do things rather than consume them. I think Roderick Chen's image in this week's gallery is immaculate - does that make me dejected? Well, no, but I think that's at least partly just my mood at the moment. But about the last thing he makes me want to do right now is rush out and buy tomatoes and try to do the same thing. And I think Shaw's book is the same in many ways - there is lots of inspiration to be gained from it, but by and large this inspiration sinks in very slowly. You carry on doing what you were doing before, but then here and there you think - "Ah, *this* is where Shaw was doing such-and-such" - and very gradually (I hope!) this pays off. > Why do you consider the other books a balm for this dejection ? > Not as awesome ? No, of course not. But you might need a change, and anyway I think that at least anyone who ever wants to photograph plants should read "On growth and form" (http://imaginatorium.org/books/ogaf.htm) because (a) it's the best book ever written, and (b) you'll understand something more about plants, which as John Shaw says is the most important thing in the end. Brian Chandler ---------------- geo://Sano.Japan.Planet_3 http://imaginatorium.org/
