Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/06/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Well... I have images on the web. Go to http://www.photoaccess.com/ then to Gallery. The first nine are mine. All Leica R images. 24, 28PC, 35PC, 35/2, 50/2, 180/2.8 . No apologies. Just scenic regional photographs. Scanned onto photo CD, from photo CD onto the web. Jim At 11:59 PM 6/11/98 -0400, you wrote: >I know that I antagonized a lot of you when I first joined this list a few >months ago. Wish I'd done it differently, but I didn't. Since then, I've >met Tom Abrahamsson (sic) and Reinhold Mueller, had two fine cameras >restored to optimal specs, and gone about my business, not in the >rumenerative sense, but as the amateur that I am. > >What surprises me a little here is all the talk of Leica specs and how >little whe actually look at each other's work; not in the sense of some >imminent judgment, but simply in the sense that the point of owning this >gear is to capture light on an emulsion. What's the point of owning this >stuff if it doesn't cause us to be better than we are, to capture more >precisely and with greater fidelity the decisive moment, the prefigured >print, whatever it is that drives us to carry and use a camera? > >I've checked out, for intance, several sites, where photos captured w/ >thousands of dollars worth of gear are indistinguishable from equivalent >images that one might have shot with a disposable camera: flat, banal, mere >reportage, which can be engaging if it reveals some sensibility, but, if >not, is nothing more than an Instamatic's glimpse into the rich world we >inhabit. > >It seems to me that the potential of the LUG is that we can exploit the >resource that the web offers in an unprecedented way. We all admire the >-Family of Man-, for instance. We could make it happen in a different way >here, to capture and present, as it were, our own, unique worlds, the >particular valence of our perspectives, share and comment upon them. > >Instead--and here I shall piss you all off again--we sputter and moan over >red dots, serial numbers, the virtues of the Noctilux, and whether the RS >series is the summa of "leica vindcated". In the end, I suppose, the whole >point of this is what do we *see*: collectively, individually . . . No >amount of talking about the resolution of an aspherical lens equals the >simple presentation of a compelling image captured with one . . . > >yrs in the pursuit of light > >Chandos > >At 02:55 PM 6/11/98 -0700, you wrote: >>Right on, Tom. The differences are lost in the scanning and even the best >>monitors are all but useless for subtle detail and tonality. Not to mention >>the effects of lossy file compression... >>However, I too love seeing what other photographers are doing. One of these >>days I may get up enough courage to post some of mine. >> >>Mike Turner >> >>At 05:31 PM 6/11/1998 EDT, TEAShea@aol.com, you wrote... >>>Some people seem to think that they can demonstrate the quality of a lens by >>>photos posted on the Internet. While one may be able to tell the difference >>>between a disposable camera and a current generation Summicron 50 2.0, it is >>>simply not possible to distinguish between higher quality lenses by this >>>method. >>> >>>This is not to say that it is not interesting to see posted photos. Such >>>photos are often very interesting and can tell a lot about the style of the >>>photographer and the subject. Such photos, however cannot distinguish >>between >>>a current generation Leica lens and a 30 year old Minolta consumer grade >>lens. >>>Both will look the same. >>> >>>When people seriously discuss the differences among reasonable quality >>lenses, >>>the differences are actually very small. These differences are much smaller >>>than the resolution ability of posted photos / monitors. >>> >>>Keep posing those photos. I love to look at them. But do not think that >>they >>>prove the quality of a lens. They don't. >>> >>>Tom Shea >>> >>> >> > > >Chandos Michael Brown >Assoc. Prof., History and American Studies >College of William and Mary > > >http://www.resnet.wm.edu/~cmbrow/ >