31–34 of 34 posts
"very long rant about the mere premise of this article. Please, for the love of god, let. it. go." I think you and many others are missing the premise of the article, if you bothered to read it at all. 9.11 is merely a setting for the image. The article is about the image, the inherent "lie" of photography in general, and about people's reaction to images such as this one. True, this is a famous image from a particul…
Re-reading this article, it makes me think of the BF Skinner pigeon experiments where he described superstitions. It also reminds me of human pattern recognition and how humans will see things when they're not there. Perhaps the falling man fell in that way by chance? I guess we'll never know, but let's not draw wild and probably invalid conclusions.
Agreed, but the article does take pains to cover this very thing. They mentioned that there were something like 11 other photos snapped of the man as he fell and, by sheer chance, the photographer caught this angle in one of the frames. In the other frames, the guy didn't look majestic . . . he looked like a guy falling 100 stories.
Re-reading this article, it makes me think of the BF Skinner pigeon experiments where he described superstitions. It also reminds me of human pattern recognition and how humans will see things when they're not there. Perhaps the falling man fell in that way by chance? I guess we'll never know, but let's not draw wild and probably invalid conclusions.
Perhaps the falling man fell in that way by chance? I guess we'll never know, but let's not draw wild and probably invalid conclusions. Agreed, but the article does take pains to cover this very thing. They mentioned that there were something like 11 other photos snapped of the man as he fell and, by sheer chance, the photographer caught this angle in one of the frames. In the other frames, the guy didn't look majest…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps the falling man fell in that way by chance? I guess we'll never know, but let's not draw wild and probably invalid conclusions. Agreed, but the article does take pains to cover this very thing. They mentioned that there were something like 11 other photos snapped of the man as he fell and, by sheer chance, the photographer caught this angle in one of the frames. In the other frames, the guy didn't look majest…
I read that part time and am not convinced. It's like when people see the image of Mary in a piece of wood or toast. We see what we want to believe.