Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/17

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Alf, Travel kit. More than two lenses. Long
From: Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 21:21:23 -0700

OK Alf, I'll take only one lens. But I'll borrow the rest from you when I
get to Germany... OK?

I didn't think I would be taken quite so seriously. My daughter and I were
thinking about bodies and lenses for the trip and the thought went through
my mind about having only one lens. Then I thought about what a
photographer does. And what an artist does. You know... stuff winds its way
around in your mind and conclusions seem to fall out. My conclusion was
that one lens is a lame idea. Sorry, that is my opinion. I like Teds idea
of spending a day with one lens. But then go back to the very same area the
next day with the rest of your tools. Then compare the visions. But to join
a photographic monastery seems somewhat extreme. And for what? As
photographers, these tools are what make us. No matter where I am, my
vision encompass more than one focal length.

So if I think a year with one body and one lens is lame, and Mike thinks a
year with one body and one lens is a revelation, and you think I am
discrediting my professional authority by voicing my opinion, well Alf,
that is your prerogative. I stand discredited. When discussing it with some
of my professional photographer friends they asked "Why would you want to
deprive yourself for such a long period of time? Is it a gimmick? I
couldn't answer because I have certain visions that I want to express, and
it will take all of my tools to cover the scope. I apologize for being so
broad minded. Or narrow minded, depending upon how you look at it. I should
not have made that original remark. I should have kept it to myself.
Actually... you folks out there who think that throwing everything out but
one body and one lens, should do just that. Since this list seems to mainly
talk about multiple bodies and multiple lenses, it seems to me that
everyone is of the opinion that it's part of the photographic experience to
use different pieces of equipment for different photographic visions. You
all may be patting someone on the back for going off and doing something
radical, without knowing why.


There's absolutely nothing wrong with someone (Mike) using one body and one
lens for a year. I wish them (him) much luck and good photographing.

I just think it's a lame idea and I would like to know what the underlying
"real" reason is for doing this. My mind set places it in the same arena
with the city council art purchases. You know... the large rusty metal
fragments that resemble sandwich scraps, stacked on city hall's front lawn.
Perhaps only understood by the perpetrator, but no one else. It has to be
very personal and therefore unexplainable.

But go for it. Raise your hand, how many are going to follow Mike into the
photographic monastery? Hummm not many hands up out there. But I won't
fault anybody for doing it. Or not doing it.

Again, I apologize for droning on and on, but I'm excited about the
photographic experience. I really like taking photographs, traveling to
different places, taking it all in. I don't want to have blinders on, like
on those horses that pull carts. I want to see everything and visualize
everything. Teaching my daughter photography is a true exhilarating
experience. It's impossible to verbalize the feeling.

So from now on, I'll keep my big mouth shut about what other people are
doing. They are indeed free to do whatever they want, however they want,
for whatever reason they want. And I am indeed interested in the results.

I'm sorry... but I like Ted's idea best.

Keep that Fred Ward soft release and that Tom Abrahammson winder working
folks...

Cheers,

Jim


At 06:58 PM 4/17/98 +0200, you wrote:
>At 00:05 17.04.1998 -0700, Jim wrote:
>>Sorry folks, taking only a 50mm lens just won't cut it! Lame idea. Maybe as
>>a local one day self assignment, ala Ted, but certainly not for serious
>>photography.
>
>
>If you discredit your professional authority by that stupid remarks, 
>you don't need to worry, that people might take your more fundamented
>comments serious.
>
>Alf
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------
>
>Alfred Breull
>http://members.aol.com/abreull/index.htm
>http://members.aol.com/mfformat/c-mf.htm
>