----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregory david Stempel" <fyrframe@centurytel.net> To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" <photoforum@listserver.isc.rit.edu> Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 7:02 PM Subject: Re: "peer review" "John Shaw's point was for technical accuracy both in exposure control and composition." ------------------------------------------------ (Are memorable art and a memorable photograph the same thing?) I haven't been following all the discussion about reviewing the Photoforum gallery , but I do think I read in an earlier post something that made me think all photographs are expected to equal "art". I can't agree with that (maybe that's where the problem with our reviewing originates - each photograph is expected to be a piece of art). I think an important job of a photographer is to record life as it happens and I find the serendipitous, candid photographs the most interesting. Because of the circumstances under which these unexpected photo ops are presented, taking the perfect photograph isn't possible. Or, if the candid moment passes and the photographer tries to reconstruct the event, the spark that made the moment exciting or interesting is missing (I know - I've tried to do this myself). Think of all the life's experiences we would miss and couldn't share if photography was used for art, only. Only perfect photographers take perfect photographs. Marilyn
