Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Where's James Russell?  (Read 6614 times)
Herb
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


« on: May 21, 2007, 08:32:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I've been reading forums for 10 years. While the net world mimics the old world in so many ways, it differs in that a few, a very few, people of REAL talent will pass on their ideas. The names change. At one time (around the release of Camera Raw) a lot of experts suddenly became true believers in Adobe. For me, (IMHO), their advice has counted for less ever since. The numbers from that time have never been replaced but there are always a few gems worth reading.

My current reading consists of searching here each day for new posts by Mark Tucker, John Sheehy and James Russell. That WAS my plan, but James has gone.

I could see both sides of the recent argument. (No better advert for free speech than that). I have no dog in the fight. But in the fight for free speech, I'm always backing the little dog. I don't know what happened, but I notice that those who don't agree with management were offered the door as an option.

Groan. No doubt those who always brown nose management will post frantically to prove a point. Sorry; but the only point you prove is that quantity is no substitute for quality.
Logged
picnic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #1 on: May 21, 2007, 08:43:23 AM »
ReplyReply

deleted---obviously wrong info, though I remember the RG brouhaha well.  I haven't been reading the MF forums here--thus missed the relatively short period of MT's posting.

Addendum:  I obviously did miss something--reading about the Lolita affair here.   I read enough other places aobut it and didn't feel any reason to read more--or comment, but there's where I missed what happened---I guess.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2007, 05:20:33 PM by picnic » Logged
wilburdl
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 21, 2007, 09:19:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Herb, I think you mean Rob Galbraith's forum--that's where the brouhaha happened, not here--and then, as people left, he sold it (that may not have been the reason but it was coincidental).  My understanding is that most of them went to a 'private' forum where they exchange ideas, humor, etc. as they wish.  I have seen James Russell here I believe---quite awhile ago, but don't remember Mark Tucker or the others--or at least not in a VERY long time. 

Diane
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118831\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

They're here. Though they don't post as frequent as they did in the RG days, they still contribute. James more so than Mark. Check the MF digital forum.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2007, 09:19:34 AM by wilburdl » Logged

Darnell
Editorial Photographer | Cartoonist
darnellwilburn.com
Herb
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


« Reply #3 on: May 21, 2007, 09:31:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
They're here. Though they don't post as frequent as they did in the RG days, they still contribute. James more so than Mark. Check the MF digital forum.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark has his tin hat on:
[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?act=Search&nav=au&CODE=show&searchid=1b38fd4ae82aca4e5642c2a215353030&search_in=posts&result_type=posts]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....sult_type=posts[/url]

but James ....

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showuser=15368

Note James is listed as 'Unregistered' here:

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=16806
Logged
troyhouse
Guest
« Reply #4 on: May 21, 2007, 11:45:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Last time I talked to James he had found a new love and was back in Texas rescuing injured armadillo's and is working on a photo book about the project. Although still shooting fashion, he said he was excited to have a direction in life. I wish him well.
Logged
BlasR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 760



WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 21, 2007, 01:14:34 PM »
ReplyReply

I think russell writing a book about the end of the world.  


He say, when he take a photo of a person, he send a check every month. so now
He want everyone to do the same, if not he get mad (ay mama). He want everyone to be like him,, He became be a dictator

James Russell it's no longer here..

Do you remmenber when someone say the end will be  year 2000?  Didn't happen.
Now I think Russell writen something like that.

I can't wait to buy the book.

BlasR
Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4896



« Reply #6 on: May 21, 2007, 02:19:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Mr. Russell sent me an email yesterday requesting that he be removed from this forum, which I did. He apparently did not agree with my use of the title Lolita and this seems to have been his way of expressing his displeasure.

A shame, really, that he can't exist in an environment where there is a difference of opinion such as this. His contributions here were valuable.

Michael
Logged
alexjones
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 80


WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 21, 2007, 02:20:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Troy,

It's a very worthy cause.  Surprising how many there are out there.  Maybe the folks here would like to help out.  Children don't get much charity from this group of people without names, maybe this could be their niche.

This forum would benifit from the voices of those that have decided it is useless to post here. It's interesting how dissenting voices are shouted down in the exchange of ideas around here.  But I'm sure the wisom of Ray & Co. can make up for it if the think real hard.  Photography is about so much more than hardware and software.  It takes a soul.

a
« Last Edit: May 21, 2007, 02:22:35 PM by alexjones » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #8 on: May 21, 2007, 02:49:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Troy,

It's a very worthy cause.  Surprising how many there are out there.  Maybe the folks here would like to help out.  Children don't get much charity from this group of people without names, maybe this could be their niche.

This forum would benifit from the voices of those that have decided it is useless to post here. It's interesting how dissenting voices are shouted down in the exchange of ideas around here.  But I'm sure the wisom of Ray & Co. can make up for it if the think real hard.  Photography is about so much more than hardware and software.  It takes a soul.

a
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118881\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have obviously missed something here, but I donīt believe that jumping ship ever proves anything nor, for that matter, does it help make things better. In the end, itīs far better and, perhaps, wiser to ignore that which displeases one and to communicate on those items which either interest one or to which one feels able to contribute in a positive manner.

There have been several such events here which have really annoyed me, but after calming down it becomes clear that there has often been genuine error in the understanding of, or, even in the presentation of the post. Naturally, there are always those who have to disagree with everything or have that terribly self-destructive need for the last word, but why not let them just have it if it means so much? There are always other threads...

The Lolita thing was always going to arrouse controversy, not because of the picture nor even the title, but simply because the world has many people who transpose their attitude onto the innocent shoulders of others. The fact that people  from different cultures have different conceptions about life, different expectations and utterly conflicting moralities doesnīt matter a jot: they have to be judged and - heaven help us - protected from things which have probably never crossed their minds. One doesnīt have to look far to see how that has impacted on us all in the wider world!

Hope the nose isnīt brown.

Ciao - Rob C
« Last Edit: May 21, 2007, 02:51:22 PM by Rob C » Logged

Herb
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


« Reply #9 on: May 21, 2007, 04:24:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have obviously missed something here, but I donīt believe that jumping ship ever proves anything .....

Maybe not. Perhaps it does prove that remarks like :

'ps: If you continue to be offended by this issue, then maybe you should just find another place to hang out that doesn't upset you as much .....'

aren't the best way of encouraging free speech. Personally, my approach is that I should need nothing more than an argument if I don't agree with someone. If I don't have an argument and feel the need to point him to the door, then maybe my case isn't strong enough.

I was shocked by the picture. I wouldn't have been some years ago but a lot of vileness against children has been exposed recently. Some of it unimaginable not long ago. I expect that Michael is an innocent living a few years in the past. Having said that, a lot of politically correct nazis in the UK would like to acquire this as a bandwagon for themselves. Still, the UK currently has the biggest news story since Diana's death - the abduction of a young child on holiday in Portugal:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/madeleine

If you click on that link and see her plight, you will find theoretical arguments become rather less important. The witch hunt against a potentially innocent man only makes the tragedy worse.

None of this is the point. My only point is that it would be better to engage in angry debate rather than show anyone the door. Most quality photographers are paranoid about secrecy. Most wouldn't tell you if they sugar their tea in case the competition got a competitive advantage. JR posted all. Sometimes, especially in the old days on RG, my jaw dropped at the detail of his business that he was prepared to post. Showing him the door because he took a stance in defence of children look like insanity to me.
Logged
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5791



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 21, 2007, 04:46:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Showing him the door because he took a stance in defence of children look like insanity to me.

Quote
Mr. Russell sent me an email yesterday requesting that he be removed from this forum, which I did. He apparently did not agree with my use of the title Lolita and this seems to have been his way of expressing his displeasure.

Herb:  If you read what Michael wrote, it sounds as though James showed himself out.  He was not asked to leave, nor was he 'given the boot'.

I've been a member and sometimes moderator for various lists over the years on a number of topics.  One thing I always try to keep in the back of my mind is that the 'net is not a dialogue, but a series of monologues.  There's also no inflection, no body language, and it's nearly impossible to write 'tongue in cheek' without resorting to emoticons or expressly writing that you are doing so (which rather defeats the purpose).  Add in that for some people English is not their first language, and you open the door to all kinds of possibilities for misinterpretation.  One of my favourite quotes is: "I know you think you understand what I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard was not what I meant."

There's an old Native story about the 'perception wheel' that goes something like this... I'll write it w/o diagrams, so use your imagination.

Imagine a circle with four people around it.  We'll call them 'A', 'B', 'C', and 'D', but you can substitute any names you want.  In the middle of the circle we'll place an arrow.  Now person 'A' looks at the arrow and, being a reasonably intelligent person, says to himself, 'That arrow is going from right to left.'  Person 'B' looks at the arrow,  and being a reasonably intelligent person, says to herself, 'That arrow is pointing toward me.'  Person 'C' looks at the arrow, and being a reasonably intelligent person says, 'That arrow is pointing from left to right.'  And person 'D' looks at the arrow and, being a reasonably intelligent person says, 'That arrow is going away from me.'

But they're all looking at the same arrow.  Now there are two ways to deal with this.  One way is to say, 'This is my arrow and so you have to see the arrow the way I see it or I'm going to take my arrow and go home'.  Possible, happens every day, but it's also highly limiting in terms of what can be learned from it.  Another possibility is to say, 'Well, that's not how I see the arrow, but I understand that you see it differently.  Maybe if we work together we can come to some different understanding.'  Also possible, also happens all of the time.  

Now, if we remove the arrow and place in the circle instead a thought, an idea, a Way of Being, a religion, a government, or a picture of a child, and if instead of four people we have forty or four hundred or six billion, then everyone is going to see that from their own perspective.  All are valid, for that person, at that time.  Tomorrow or in the next minute their perceptions may change.  

And the bottom line is, sometimes we may have to agree to disagree.  And that's okay, if we can still hold to our own ideas and respect those of others.

We can even bring this back to photography.  In Holland, some child pornography is legal.  In some Islamic countries, the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition could get you into trouble.  Who's right?  Who gets to decide?  And is it worth killing people to find out?

My $0.02

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
pprdigital
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 21, 2007, 06:16:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Mr. Russell sent me an email yesterday requesting that he be removed from this forum, which I did. He apparently did not agree with my use of the title Lolita and this seems to have been his way of expressing his displeasure.

A shame, really, that he can't exist in an environment where there is a difference of opinion such as this. His contributions here were valuable.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118879\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I can assure you that James did not leave because he can't exist in an environment where there is a difference of opinion. In fact, James seems to thrive on differences of opinion. I know because I've had my share with him and we still remain in good standing with each other.

Rather, while I can't speak for him, it is more likely that he chose to leave rather than be associated with someone who chooses not to understand how inappropriate his treatment of this poor (literal sense), young girl was.

Steve Hendrix
Professional Photographic Resources
www.ppratlanta.com
Logged

Steve Hendrix
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 21, 2007, 06:36:50 PM »
ReplyReply

first.. i am a huge fan of robert mapplethorpe...who was arrested for showing "child pornography" in a museum....i am an even bigger fan of egon schiele, who spent time in jail for his "pornographic child paintings"....both artists showed full on genitalia in their works....i do not find these work pornographic at all...they are in no way mean to arouse or in any way sexual...they are portraits of the human condition.....


taking a shot of a little girl in a 3rd world country and getting a pose that she cannot understand the implications/reactions to to, because she cannot have posed to entice the viewer to any kind of sexual interaction and then calling the shot "lolita" and thereby OBVIOUSLY giving it a sexual meaning...i am not sure what to say or think.....

let me put it this way...for those who (as i am very much!!!) are for free speech.....

how would you feel if i spend some time with your 7 year old daughter we play around and she falls back and lays on the floor, legs spread looking up at me laughing....i take that shot and post it on the web under the title lolita.....i am sure you would love to see that.....sometimes you don't take the shot, because the person being shot is not aware at that moment....this is even more important with kids....this is not my dirty mind at work....i have no problem with nudity at all....

i am not saying that michael is a pornographer..at all...but i cannot understand how he could NOT have understood the direction this image was going...and then he chooses that title?! hello!

besides the point that i haven't seen too many shots by him posted that are mostly and mainly about one character....usually his people are mere props to the composition.....and the one shot that isn't like that has a serious undercurrent and if there was any misunderstanding about the undercurrent (just in case) he calls it lolita?  and there are people here talking about free speech?

this is not about free speech...michael can say whatever he wants....this is about good taste.....
i completely understand why james would leave.....my jaw dropped when i first saw the pic and the title....
Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4896



« Reply #13 on: May 21, 2007, 07:54:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Showing him the door because he took a stance in defence of children look like insanity to me.

What utter rubbish. Can't you read? He asked to be removed.

I have no further tolerence for this sort of misrepresentation.

So, give it a rest, will you! All of you. Enough fatuous insinuations, misrepresentations, and nonsense.

Those that are offended will just have to learn to live with the fact that i have a different perspective on this, as do about 95% of the people that I know, or who have been in touch with me on this. My friends, family and professonal associates are simply aghast at the accusations being made, and shake their heads in amazement that I continue to tolerate the insults for even one more day.

So, enough!! There is no further debate. This forum will not be hijacked.

Those that disagree with me have every right to do so, but I don't wish to have any further bandwidth on this site devoted to the subject.

Have I made myself clear enough?

No replies necessary. No new threads. Let's move on. End of discussion.

Michael.

This topic is now closed.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2007, 08:29:58 PM by michael » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad