Re: Phillistines who own Leicas (fwd)

[fortunko@boulder.nist.gov (C.M. Fortunko)]

I agree with much of what you have to say. A friend of mine (claims to be a
student of Cartier-Bresson) says that people like Adams were catalogers.
Sometimes, I agree.

However, I do not agree that the Leica is the best camera for people to use
in unpredicatble situations. To use it effectively, one needs to develop a
shooting style. Cartier-Bresson had one. Other greats had one.

For unpredicatble situations what is best is a predicable point-and-shoot
camera. Probably the "wunderplastick" Leica minizoom would be very good. My
wife likes it, because it is simple to use and can capture many memorable
situations with slightly greater reliability than my M5.

Ansel Adams was a great man. There is no question about it. However, his
books are probably best for the f/64 generation. M and screw-mount Leicas
demand a different style. I am sure that Adams would agree. I love some of
his pre-war pictures taken with a Contax. He was a real professional, but
may have hitched his wagon to the wrong formats.

Pax et Lux,

Chris Fortunko

>> I would strongly suggest getting your hands on the last edition of Ansel
>> Adam's book  The Negative and reading the first two or three chapters where
>> exposure and the zone system are explained.  Alternatively, you could get a
>> copy of Fred Picker's Zone VI Workshop.  There are probably other good books
>> out there about the Zone system.  The Zone system is much easier to grasp
>> than many technophiles and understanding the principles by which is works
>> are, in my opinion, extremely useful even if you never use the system.
>
>I think it's just plain nuts to recommend this mumbo-jumbo to a newcomer
>with a Leica.  I used to have Minor White's book on it, long since ditched
>in another continent; the least useful photography book I have ever owned.
>(The bogus-classical posturing of White's pictures doesn't do much for me,
>either).  Get a straight down-to-earth text that explains stuff like what
>flare is and how to avoid it, why you don't always want to use the same
>film and what choices you've got, what hyperfocal distance is and why it
>matters... none of which is in _The Negative_.  And, in parallel with that,
>look at _pictures_, lots of them.
>
>The zone system is intended for people with the time to meter each little
>detail in what they're photographing, hunting out the deepest shadows and
>brightest highlights, and ideally fiddling around with processing to treat
>every negative differently.  The last is flat impossible except with a sheet
>film camera; and for what Leicas are best at - shooting fast in unpredictable
>situations - you never have time to do all that metering, and in the worst
>case you could end up run over, shot or devoured by wildlife while wondering
>whether to place that rhino poacher's gun barrel in Zone I or II.  (And it's
>no help at all with the most immediate problems of handling colour films).
>The results of this craze are scads of technically spiffy images with zero
>feeling or content; like advertising images that didn't make it to the
>billboard.  From people who think "visualization" means only how to monkey
>about with tonal scales, not how to know when something out there in the
>world in front of you *needs* to be seen by others...
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>jack@purr.demon.co.uk  -  Jack Campin, 2 Haddington Place, Edinburgh EH7 4AE
>
>
>
>