civilized ku # 2198 ~ good riddance
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 at 04:10PM ;)
Empty lot ~ Plattsburgh, NY • click to embiggenI haven't posted for a few days for a couple reasons.
First, I am quite busy working for a client who, upon prepping to start a new professional practice, has contracted with me to create a logo, design and supervise the production of his business identity materials (announcements, cards, stationary, etc.), design and produce his website, and create and manage a 2 month / 3 newspaper + web media advertising campaign. He has also purchased 8 of my pictures (24×24 inch) for his office walls. In addition to handling the printing and framing, he has also hired me to hang, not only my prints, but all of his existing art and certificate stuff as well.
All of which must be complete and in place by May 25th.
Second, I have spent/wasted some time thinking about how to respond to a comment which was intended to be left on a recent entry. That comment has not appeared on the blog for 2 reasons: 1) any comment which contains links is automatically withheld pending my approval and this comment had links, and, 2) I decided to handle the comment by simply deleting it, something I have done only a couple times over the past 5 years.
Why did I delete it?
Simply because I am sick and tired of responding to comments in which the author puts words in my mouth (so to speak write). In this case, the author also put words in the mouth of another commenter. Additionally, the comment contained statements / assertions about my position on some things, picture wise, which were simply in direct contradiction to matters about which I written repeatedly.
Either the commenter didn't read those entries or has chosen, for whatever reason, to simply ignore them. In either case, the commenter was woefully misinformed in his put-words-in-my-mouth comment and I am not going to waste my time addressing such comments. I've got too many other constructive things to do with my time, like, say, pick my nose and then count the boogers.
All of that said, I want it to be understood that I encourage and welcome comments which take issue with my various POVs, but ... only when a commenter takes a substantive and informed position relative to my actual (as opposed to assumed) POV on a topic. Not on the POV of whether or not I am an arrogant asshole.
BTW, here's a good read on why, when viewing a picture, having some knowledge about the place (and time) of that picture's making (in order have a more complete appreciation and understanding of that picture) is inherently a good thing.
Reader Comments (3)
I've mentioned it before, but I really like the "luminous clarity" I've been seeing in Mark's recent images.
On this concept (probably more to do with technical IQ than anything else), I recently stumbled across a Leica X2 review (with very good images) on the blog of Ming Thein. He writes...
"that ‘Leica look’ (which I think most lay people mistake for bokeh, but is actually a combination of that, color transmission, sharpness, focus transition and microcontrast ..."
So maybe that's a technical explanation for the characteristics behind the "luminuous clarity" I'm seeing. That and pointing the camera in the right direction ;)
So, not only do you refer to my comment without letting me respond, but you also misrepresent my view 100 %. That is quite charming, but sadly not very surprising. I have followed your blog pretty much since the beginning, and I early realized that vitriol against anything that is not within the narrow confines of your personal preference is part of the package. This is.. a bit over the top though. You are free to censor the comments on your blog as much as you want, but if you refer to my comments, misrepresent a censored comment AND rant on about it, you can count on me being a good riddance for sure.
good bye