What is Michael Reichmann's 'schtick'?

[Jorge]

I don't get it.

errrr....(insert frustrated grumble here).

I think the sour grapes comes from another one who is always pro digital in an all analog forum....I guess he can't stand it we dont want to talk about the digigizmos....

[mark]

Oh.

[ndevlin]

Personally, I can't understand why anyone would be bothered in any way by Michael's site or any other than is geniunely interested in photography. I haven't shot a roll of film in longer than I like to admit, but I still enjoy this site because it keeps me in touch with a dimension of photography that interests me and provides the occasional bit of inspiration to try something new or different, or just to go and shoot.

The luminous landscape offers much the same thing. There's content on it that not digital-related and the digital elements should be of general interest to even those who don't practice in that media but like to know where the art is going.

It's far from "perfect," but it's a damn-site more interesting than my website (which doesn't exist), don't you think? Moreover, it's free, and you can leave anytime you like.

[rich815]

"His collected body of work is very strong"

Then why does he not post any of his "very strong" work on his site?

[gr82bart]

I've been following MR's website too. He is very pro digital. Some of his equipment reviews were very condescending on those that shoot film.

I find that a lot with digital photographers. Ironically, I shoot both, but much prefer film.

Art.