Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/12/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]And even though you invited this level of commentary Doug I too found it difficult to actually express some of those points; knowing such comments can strike nerves. I make no claim to actually "know" your next set of goals. Simply another set of opinions based on what I've seen by you and others. Yet I suspect that, now that you've mastered many of your previous goals, you do have a new set. I find great pleasure (and some balance) from daily readings in a book titled "365 Tao." The book is structured to have the readings relate to season according to Northern or Southern hemisphere. Very often (and this is spooky) the readings relate directly to something here and now in my life. Such is the case with today's reading; relating directly to this discussion: Headline: "Template" Opening Verse: "Must you see nature as a machine? Is your only learning chemistry, physics, and ontology? What if poetry was your template for life? Can't you know Tao by the feeling of mud in your sandals? Thus are the sages called silly: They have given up their prejudices." Excerpts from text that follows: "By the time we are "mature," we have created innumerable layers of interpretation and biased perception that become our templates for living. Of course, we could have some fun with this situation. We could change the templates that we use to interact with the world. and Templates are essential for beginners, a hinderance for veterans. True followers of Tao give up all templates and are without prejudices. They return to the actions of infants. Thus they are called silly. But because they view the world with their inner eye, they transcend all the sorrows of life." ;~) Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist On Dec 18, 2009, at 7:36 AM, Doug Herr wrote: > George this is the level of critique that will do me the most good, > thank you! I didn't like reading parts of it but it's accurate > IMHO and illustrates a few areas where I'd like to consistently > improve my photos. > > For example: I want less static compositions. This doesn't mean > action photos, it means visually playful, appealing to the artist > as well as to the biologist. Knowing how much time and thought I'd > have to invest to produce a comparable critique, I realize that > this level of critique isn't something I should expect all the time > but I do appreciate it.