[QUOTE]\n[QUOTE="Michael Scarpitti"]\n[...]\nI have for many years complained that too much ZS work simply looks\nunnatural and contrived, and, yes, boring.[/QUOTE]\n\nWell, of course it looks boring. Most 35mm photography is boring, too. Most\nof everything is boring. 99% of everything is crap. So what? Were you\nbuggered by some ZS bigot? With ZS one learns where his tones can be placed\nand can expose/develop accordingly _or not_. Is there something wrong with\nmaking an informed decision before the image is made?[/QUOTE]\n\nThe answer to that is pretty obvious to me (speaking for MS here). Yes,\nthere's something quite wrong with that, according to his lights.\n\nFor he goes from the one (perceived) extreme-\-that of the glacial Zone System\nphotographer agonizing over Yet Another Water and Rocks scene for hours,\nfurtively scribbling Roman numerals, to squeeze out yet another deathly boring\nprint-\-to the opposite extreme: the urbane boulevardier, the Henri Cartier\nBresson clone, nimbly snapping off crisp, pithy Street Pictures (always at the\nDecisive Moment, of course), with the intrepid air of a Zen master (and with\nas little regard to anything resembling deliberation, thinking or any such\nartifice which would only get in the way of the Ultimate Act).\n\nIt's as if he, enlisting in the H.C.B. Fan Club at a tender age (I'm guessing\naround the same time he achieved the apogee of his career, his stint as photog\nfor the college yearbook, for chrissake) was inculcated with a burning and\nunrelenting hatred for those geeks in that *other* fan club, over there in the\nArt building behind their big boxy cameras on tripods (he being a devotée of\nphotojournalism). Talk about a triumph of style over substance!\n\nNow what else do you want me to explain?