P3D Uniqueness

[fj834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Dr. George A. Themelis)]

Boris wrote:

>I think the most interesting photography can in part be defined by its
>uniqueness.  Either it is unique because of artistic composition, or it is
>unique because of the subject matter.  That may depend on a unique
>location, or unique action, or even common locations or actions seen in a
>unique way.  The best photography may fulfill several of these ideals.

That's a very nice way of putting it and I agree.

I would add that good photography has uniqueness and interest.  I add
interest because there are some unique photographs that fail to be
interesting.... like those lunar rocks I saw in stereo.  Very unique
subject but, for a non-specialist, very bo-o-ring!

One comment regarding uniqueness, novelties and long-term values:  Every
new technique at first is overrated exactly because of this uniqueness and
novelty.  My first Realist shots were seen (by myself) as masterpieces. 
Same for my first close-ups, hyperstereos, etc.  Now, these first attempts
don't look very good any more.  I suspect that the same happens or is
happening with the stereo community as it is faced with new techniques,
tools and subjects, like computer-generated images, etc.  It is only after
the medium is saturated that good quality prevails.

Good luck with your planned work on nature stereo photography!

-- George Themelis


------------------------------