One Year Of Taking My M10 To Trump Protests

[Tragg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The original post by John Buckley stated: “I received my Leica M10 from the Leica Store DC.  I got it just in time for the Women's March protesting Trump's inauguration… thus began a journey of taking my M10 to demonstrations, sometimes on a weekly basis.”

 

He continued  “After a year of using the M10 exclusively with the 35mm Summilux, I can report that it is the finest digital M they've yet made, an absolutely reliable and intuitive street camera.  The combo of the M10 with the 35mm Summilux is like a marriage made in Heaven, perfect in every way.”  

 

Though John made NO partisan political comment his post immediately received a negative response from those presumably offended by the anti-Trump images that accompanied the post.

 

In my opinion, it was these comments that politicised what had begun simply as an account of a photographer using Leica equipment in a journalistic context – an aspect of photography that has a long and honourable history. Why weren't they dealt with by the moderators?

[geetee1972]

 

In my opinion, it was these comments that politicised what had begun simply as an account of a photographer using Leica equipment in a journalistic context – an aspect of photography that has a long and honourable history. Why weren't they dealt with by the moderators?

 

The whole point of photo journalism, indeed all journalism, is to provoke debate, explore ideas, reach consensus or, if not, to understand where our beliefs differ or converge. It is utterly anathema to civilised society and indeed photography as an artistic and documentary medium, to post images that are social commentary in nature, particularly around a subject as contentious as Trump and then try to stiffle any kind of political dialogue. Why bother posting the pictures in the first place? Without the dialogue they're just snaps.

 

Of course, it's perfectly reasonable to also express sadness that a thread derails into mud slinging and cat calling; it's just not reasonable to start censoring those kinds of debates. That is afterall what happened in Russia and Germany in the last century and what still happens now place like North Korea.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Tragg]

The whole point of photo journalism, indeed all journalism, is to provoke debate, explore ideas, reach consensus or, if not, to understand where our beliefs differ or converge. It is utterly anathema to civilised society and indeed photography as an artistic and documentary medium, to post images that are social commentary in nature, particularly around a subject as contentious as Trump and then try to stiffle any kind of political dialogue. Why bother posting the pictures in the first place? Without the dialogue they're just snaps.

 

Of course, it's perfectly reasonable to also express sadness that a thread derails into mud slinging and cat calling; it's just not reasonable to start censoring those kinds of debates. That is afterall what happened in Russia and Germany in the last century and what still happens now place like North Korea.

 

It’s is the stated policy of this forum's moderator that, I quote "Partisan political discussions are not welcome." Since the original post made NO partisan political comment it is my contention that this thread was politicised by subsequent posts. I am certainly not advocating censorship but suggesting that, in the light of the forum’s stated policy, comments of a political nature should have been dealt with accordingly.

Edited January 24, 2018 by Tragg

[geetee1972]

 

It’s is the stated policy of this forum's moderator that, I quote "Partisan political discussions are not welcome."

 

Then the stated policy is an ass.

 

Be polite, courteous and civil sure but don't discuss politics? That is absurd.

Edited January 24, 2018 by geetee1972

[Simon]

I believe this thread has devolved into a discussion on the merits of taking political photos because of one silly (in my mind) comment suggesting they’re of no value. It’s not been a political discussion. That comment should’ve been removed. It’s been almost universally derided in the comments since. Everyone has been very civil.

 

Once again to the OP, great pics. And I also like that photo at the Trump rally.

Edited January 26, 2018 by Simon

[Simon]

Then the stated policy is an ass.

 

Be polite, courteous and civil sure but don't discuss politics? That is absurd.

This comes up from time to time. I can understand the policy because political discussions can often (nay usually) descend into boring flame wars that have nothing to do with Leica, photography or specific images. On the other hand, almost everything is political to some degree and certainly political photo-journalism should be allowed. On that I don’t think there’s been any debate. See my post above. It seems there’s only one person that has a problem with this. Edited January 26, 2018 by Simon

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

[...] press the back link for context

 

In my opinion, it was these comments that politicised what had begun simply as an account of a photographer using Leica equipment in a journalistic context – an aspect of photography that has a long and honourable history. Why weren't they dealt with by the moderators?

 

If all that is required to make an image acceptable is to have it made with a Leica, then there is a problem. Think upon that.

 

Regarding strictly journalism and this site if the images are largely of text, then there is a complication which can over-ride claims of 'journalism'. Just how many crappy snapshots of "[whomever] sucks" does to take to be inappropriate photos to this sites rules?

 

Not all photographs are 'just photographs'.

Edited January 27, 2018 by pico

[jdlaing]

If all that is required to make an image acceptable is to have it made with a Leica, then there is a problem. Think upon that.

 

Regarding strictly journalism and this site if the images are largely of text, then there is a complication which can over-ride claims of 'journalism'. Just how many crappy snapshots of "[whomever] sucks" does to take to be inappropriate photos to this sites rules?

 

Not all photographs are 'just photographs'.

There is not one thing wrong with the photographs being posted.

 

The replies and comments however............

[Pjay]

We need an explanation for the fact that a moderator is free to flout forum rules, without any apparent consequence.

 

In his explanation about what this forum is for, Andreas wrote, 'If you don’t like a photo, there’s nothing wrong with offering constructive criticism. What we won’t put up with are derogatory, insulting and disparaging comments.'

 

Yet a moderator has commented in this thread:

‘A $20 camera could do the same.’

‘IOW you were just another spectator, you had a camera, and no clue and abandoned responsibility 'leaving it to the viewer'. Another argument for robotic cameras.’

‘crappy snapshots’

 

One would expect a moderator to set an example of abiding by forum rules, and of making comments that showed some degree of grace and tolerance.

[Tragg]

The photograph that appears in the original post was taken at an anti Trump demonstration and as might be expected includes a placard. The picture is NOT largely of text but focuses on what appears to be a mother with her daughter. This is a real event that took place and was captured in a photograph. Are you suggesting that a photograph of a person reading a newspaper should be excluded from this forum because the headline contains political comment that someone here might disagree with? The merit of the photos in terms of technical ability and aesthetics is a separate issue and not relevant to this thread – though I will say that I find your comments rude, patronising and spiteful.

[Pjay]

Yes, I know, post #49 should refer to a member and not a moderator.  But his comments are still obnoxious........

[erl]

Then the stated policy is an ass.

 

Be polite, courteous and civil sure but don't discuss politics? That is absurd.

You opinion about the policy is just that.

The rule you refer to is just that. Not absurd, just the rule.

[erl]

I believe this thread has devolved into a discussion on the merits of taking political photos because of one silly (in my mind) comment suggesting they’re of no value. It’s not been a political discussion. That comment should’ve been removed. It’s been almost universally derided in the comments since. Everyone has been very civil.

 

Once again to the OP, great pics. And I also like that photo at the Trump rally.

Attempting to be impartial, and NOT speaking with my mods hat on, I will express MY opinion. That is all it is. Not a ruling.

 

The posted images IMO opinion are not journalistic because (I assume the OP was not on assignment). They therefore become documentary, by my definition. Most of the stuff we see on this forum is documentary. Because a poster chooses to criticize the images, that is his/her prerogative. Just as it is the choice of the OP to put his pictures up. But please let's not be so precious about our pics that no one is allowed to NOT like them and say why. If I am correct, the critic did say why he was unimpressed with the pics. So where is the problem?

 

For what it is worth, if I am discussing the same comments, I agree with them. They are not journalist standard in my view, but that matters not. It is only opinion. Get over it. People don't like or understand a lot of my pictures either. Their problem, not mine.

[coupdefoudre]

Man, who knew Leica folk were such sensitive souls!

[pico]

We need an explanation for the fact that a moderator is free to flout forum rules, without any apparent consequence.

[...]

Yet a moderator has commented in this thread:

‘A $20 camera could do the same.’

‘IOW you were just another spectator, you had a camera, and no clue and abandoned responsibility 'leaving it to the viewer'. Another argument for robotic cameras.’

‘crappy snapshots’

 

Learn up. A moderator did not make those comments. I did, and I stand by every post I made. Read them all.

 

A banal image consisting almost entirely of a sign, a banner, and no other redeeming, insightful, important information is just plain stupid, worthless. I am a retired news photographer/photojournalist and I know empty work, minimal effort, absent judgement, amateur crap when I see it. You should, too,

 

There was nothing in that photo but text someone held up to be captured. It sucked in the lazy photographer.  It was the kind of message that if shifted a one octave would not be permitted on a German hosted server. It is not worthy photography.

 

Read up again. Make my day.

Edited January 28, 2018 by pico

[Pjay]

Learn up. A moderator did not make those comments. I did, and I stand by every post I made. Read them all.

 

A banal image consisting almost entirely of a sign, a banner, and no other redeeming, insightful, important information is just plain stupid, worthless. I am a retired news photographer/photojournalist and I know empty work, minimal effort, absent judgement, amateur crap when I see it. You should, too,

 

There was nothing in that photo but text someone held up to be captured. It sucked in the lazy photographer.  It was the kind of message that if shifted a one octave would not be permitted on a German hosted server. It is not worthy photography.

 

Read up again. Make my day.

 

Once again:

In his explanation about what this forum is for, Andreas wrote, 'If you don’t like a photo, there’s nothing wrong with offering constructive criticism. What we won’t put up with are derogatory, insulting and disparaging comments.'

 

Pico, this is my last comment on this matter, but you clearly continue to flout forum rules, and any standard of polite and respectful comment. Adjectives like 'banal', 'stupid' and 'worthless' say far more about you than they do about the OP and his images. As for your use of 'amateur crap', that could be applied to most of the images on photographic forums, including mine! This is a case of inadequate moderator intervention IMHO, so I will refrain from further involvement.

[jaapv]

...said no democratic body ever.

...said no democratic body ever.

Read the forum rules: this is a privately owned forum, not a democracy. The

[euston]

I hope you enjoy the images.  More important, I hope you are enjoying the greatest digital rangefinder of all time.

 

Keep up the good work, John! I especially enjoyed the photos in your gallery at

http://www.tulipfrenzyphotography.com/new-gallery-2/

 

There are some very interesting and telling shots among them. Much of the criticism you’ve come in for has been just plain ridiculous.

 

I hope you’ll carry on documenting and posting these rallies and carry on enjoying the wonderful M10! 

[Tragg]

Attempting to be impartial, and NOT speaking with my mods hat on, I will express MY opinion. That is all it is. Not a ruling.

 

The posted images IMO opinion are not journalistic because (I assume the OP was not on assignment). They therefore become documentary, by my definition. Most of the stuff we see on this forum is documentary. Because a poster chooses to criticize the images, that is his/her prerogative. Just as it is the choice of the OP to put his pictures up. But please let's not be so precious about our pics that no one is allowed to NOT like them and say why. If I am correct, the critic did say why he was unimpressed with the pics. So where is the problem?

 

For what it is worth, if I am discussing the same comments, I agree with them. They are not journalist standard in my view, but that matters not. It is only opinion. Get over it. People don't like or understand a lot of my pictures either. Their problem, not mine.

 

Constructive criticism yes, rude and arrogant comments, no.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Tragg]

Learn up. A moderator did not make those comments. I did, and I stand by every post I made. Read them all.

 

A banal image consisting almost entirely of a sign, a banner, and no other redeeming, insightful, important information is just plain stupid, worthless. I am a retired news photographer/photojournalist and I know empty work, minimal effort, absent judgement, amateur crap when I see it. You should, too,

 

There was nothing in that photo but text someone held up to be captured. It sucked in the lazy photographer.  It was the kind of message that if shifted a one octave would not be permitted on a German hosted server. It is not worthy photography.

 

Read up again. Make my day.

You come across as rude, patronising, spiteful and bitter