P3D Email to George Tremelis (DrT-3d) re"good composition...totally subjective"

[ThreeDeKen@xxxxxxx]

With his permission, I submit this to the rest of you, realizing that as a 
newcomer, a disputation with one, whom I presume to be in good standing with 
you, may not be the best way to introduce myself.  I'll pursue a remedy for 
that later; taking my chances now.  Following, is my email to George:

"Subj:  Subjective composition; P3D 3713.txt
Date:   2/10/00 9:07:13 PM Pacific Standard Time
From:   ThreeDeKen
To: DrT-3d@xxxxxxx

Greetings, George, from San Diego - again:

In the above-referenced email, I noticed the following (e pluribus unum):

"If good composition was totally subjective then really there
would not be such a thing as studying photography, beyond the
technical aspects, I would think."

 Philosophically speaking, good composition is totally  subjective.  The fact 
that there exists underlying similarities in good composition, simply put, 
means that those of us (I'm not hypocritically modest) who employ good 
composition, without having studied the rules do so because what thrills us 
in a proposed 3-D composition just happens to employ intrinsic values that 
can be studied and taught to others who are less gifted in the art of 3-D 
photography.  

It's similar to writing a book.  One can write a top seller without ever 
having studied composition.  But, an analysis of that piece of literature by 
the scholars will reveal that the writer employed devices (innately divined 
by that writer) which constitute the underpinnings of all well-written 
literature:  devices that can be learned by others.  I think that you will 
agree that those who are remembered in the "arts" are those whose style 
deviated from the "norm" -- artists who were inventive:  intuitive.  The rest 
of the artists learn from them.  One of the few places where this is severely 
restricted is in the performing arts.  Specifically, members of an orchestra.

But, back to 3-D photography.  I think that there are gifted photographers in 
the same essence as there are gifted mathematicians, physicists; composers, 
writers, et al.  And the nice thing about this whole concept is that the 
gifted person does his/her own thing (60's philosophy), as has been done 
since the "invention of man", and others can take note of what inspired the 
product of that person's mind and are free to emulate the process.  Equate it 
with the chicken or the egg conundrum, if you wish (I prefer the chicken), 
but my thinking is that whereas good composition can be taught, it began 
subjectively in some creative mind:  after which, it could be taught to 
others.

I hope you don't mind this reaction to your thinking.  Also, I don't know if 
these things are open to debate in the Digest (as a forum), and decided that 
a private note to you would probably be more appropriate.

Later .... 

Ken
threedeken@xxxxxxx

As you can see, I'm signed up for the Photo-3D Digest."

Ken
threedeken@xxxxxxx