View Camera Magazine Needs a Proofreader - Again

**Kirk Gittings** · 29-Apr-2005, 13:10

If you saw a great student portfolio with dust spots ...

I once saw a portfolio of Joel Merowitz on exhibit at a prestigious museum. The whole portfolio was unspoted. I would die personally before I let that happen, but I am pickier perhaps than some. You get my drift. Some people are just not detail oriented. They just have a vision for the big picture and for Steve that vision was VC. It is a great vision and with some historic significance. What I don't understand is the need for people to do this criticism publically. This is very shortsighted for professionals and would be professionals. It might be called shooting yourself in the foot.

**David A. Goldfarb** · 29-Apr-2005, 13:43

Indeed, an editor should be a big picture guy, but that's why editors hire people like proofreaders to handle the details. Heck, if Meyerowitz were to give his spotting work to an assistant, I wouldn't fault him for it.

Why are people always criticizing Steve Simmons publically? I have a few theories, but posting them on the forum might constitute "piling on."

**Robert McClure** · 30-Apr-2005, 10:33

I observe that Mr. Gittings above seems to allow that Mr. Simmons may be a "big picture" kind of guy. While allowing this, he refers to his own pickiness, and allows that others might not feel about spotting as he does. He seems neither passive, nor aggressive (as some in the thread seem to be). He seems assertive. That is, he appears comfortable to state what his own perspective is (on spotting, for example). But he doesn't seem to demand that others adopt his view (or be condemned for failure to do what they OUGHT, MUST, or SHOULD do). Ought/must/should has to have some moral authority behind it.

Not surprisingly, Mr. Gittings also seems to celebrate what Mr. Simmons is and what he has accomplished. He seems less interested in Mr. Simmons' other errors.

And going to someone privately with whom you have a beef (as Mr. Gittings also expresses) implies your goal is truth as you "see" it, while focusing above all else on the individual with whom you disagree and not wanting to damage that connection and fellowship.

As "artists" (whatever the word means), often with private thoughts and feelings (our work) we'd like to share with others, it occurs to me that our motives might need to be, well, kind of pure. If I may put it that way. Or at least free of the kind of stuff that may only contaminate the place inside us from where we "come." This is all a little nebulous, I know. But that's the way it seems to be when we talk about whatever it is within us that drives us to make the photographs
we do. That place deep inside us needs to be cultivated like a garden, I think. It's precious.

Even politicians understand the value of (posturing as if to be) taking the higher moral ground.
Their possible deception aside, they still understand something of what we're all made of. They head for Truth, despite their misuse of it sometimes.

Mr. Simmons' accomplishment is significant. I don't overlook typos and other editorial considerations because I am blind or ignorant. I simply choose to focus on the strengths of others because that safeguards that very mysterious and fragile place within me, and maybe in the other person. These "places" are, for me, very precious.

I would be really great to meet all of you guys some day soon.

**Kirk Gittings** · 30-Apr-2005, 22:04

I simply choose to focus on the strengths of others because that safeguards that very mysterious and fragile place within me, and maybe in the other person.

Well said. Come to the VC conference and we can meet, observe each others strenghts and have a pint to celebrate our flaws.

**Robert McClure** · 2-May-2005, 08:19

As a matter of fact I hadn't even contemplated coming to the conference. But thanks for asking, Kirk. I need to, truly. Thanks!!

Yes, I agree with you that flaws are celebrateable. Never thought "flaws" and "pint" could work in the same sentence before. Wow!

Regards

**RichSBV** · 2-May-2005, 13:25

Perfection is an unattainable, artificial concept. By nature, we look for flaws. It is those flaws that create the beauty....

And after that, I'm sorry to say there's no way I could attend the conference (not that anyone would know one way or the other ;-)

So I'll celebrate with a pint. Or with luck, 3 pints and a package of salted peanuts!