Hello, Larry ... I'd like to clear up what may be a misunderstanding. I ~did not~ say that Boris' pic was "just a snapshot ..." I said it was a " a nice snap, nothing great, although it provides a nice 'feel' for the area."
That said, words, especially outside of a clear context, are often ambiguous even though they may have specific definitions. Context, custom, society, body language when spoken, can all add layers of meaning to a word. To an amateur P&S camera operator, saying that their photo is a nice snap may be a high compliment. To a more accomplished photographer, or one who is "serious" about his or her work, it may be considered as "less than complimentary." Further, let's consider the importance of snapshots. The worlsd is filled with them. We all take them. They, more than any other type of photo, document our culture societies, record events great and small, and provide records of transitions and situations. When there is a disaster, the victims are often heard to say that they saved the family photos - often a shoebox of snapshots. Just to put this in a little context, I sometimes consider the word "image" when used instead of photograph to have something of a negative connotation. Yet others see nothing at all of the negative (sometimes quite literally) when using the word. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Larry Cook > In the sentence "It is just a snpashot." it appears to be perjorative > but how much so is unclear without more context. However it is clear > that it is not a positive expression. In a number of instances one will > use the term snapshot instead of photograph because it is believed by > some that the latter term conveys a higher status (or the former term a > lower one). [...] > Finally, in the case of Shel's comment that inspired this thread, I > believe that it was being used as merely a synonym for photo or > photograph and implied no meaning whatsoever. > > That is the conclusion, if one is needed, that I draw from this > interesting discussion.
