>>3648929>>3648935See?
>>3648939Literally just used the famous photographer most well-known for using a Leica for the majority of his work. Wasn’t trying to show off the depth or breadth of my knowledge of the great masters of photography. The particular photographer I chose was tangential at best to my central argument so I didn’t put a heck of a lot of thought into it. If you really want to flex your dick that hard at proving you know more about other photographers than me, that’s fine, you probably do. I would like to spend more time studying the great photographers of the past and present, but I would also like to spend a large amount of my free time taking pictures, and I also have a day job, so the bigass Taschen book of famous photographers has sat neglected while my Leica hasn’t. I’m at peace with that.
