Re: [Leica] HCB vs. modern lenses

[Mark Walberg <Walberg@simmons.swmed.edu>]

I agree with you , Alexy, that many of these pictures make good use of
regional  focus to make them work.  I don't recall any picture in the book
that would be improved by increased sharpness or contrast.  I'm saying the
opposite.
   What I am trying to say is that adding crisp sharp detail and high
contrast would detract from more than a few of these pictures.  I gave the
book back to the library.  However, the picture of the woman in the crowd
with the pope is a good example.  That picture would not be helped at all
if you were able to see great detail of the texture of the people's
clothes, the dandruff on their shoulders, maybe an interesting whorl of
hair on someone's cheek, etc.  Probably, this kind of detail and contrast
would distract your focus of attention away from that interesting face on
the woman.  So, I am saying that even in addition to the tool of selective
focus, there are pictures, like this one, where high sharpness and contrast
would actually work against the picture.   The two people in bed is another
example that is really too obvious.
    Very certainly, many people's pictures really do depend on high
contrast and sharpness.  That's fine use the best tool for the job, as
another LUGger has said.   The best tool for the job is not always the
newest, sharpest lens.  Many  say that better sharpness and better flare
suppression can't hurt.  I disagree.

 By the way, that Oz summary is hilarious.   -Mark Walberg

>-Mark Walberg writes:
>>So, I was looking through the HCB Aperture book last night, too - I've
>>got it out from our local library.  I wonder how some of those pictures
>>in there would look if taken with a current generation, sharp as my old
>>barber's freshly stropped blade  Summicron, with every last bit of flare
>>suppressed.  I think many of those pictures would still look great.
>>However, there are definitely some that would suffer from all that
>>crisply rendered detail, which would distract your attention away from
>>what makes some of these pictures great.
>
>I think that a lot of us on this list own that, or other, HCB books.
>Maybe it woud be interesting to be more specific? *Which* images would
>be stronger with more detail, or with a lens displaying reduced spherical
>aberration? While sharpness may be overrated, it's clear that a lot of
>HCB's images work through the *regional* control of focus vs. out-of
>-focus and movement-blurred vs. frozen areas. The Aperture book contains
>abundant examples - the photo of the crowd surrounding the Pope, with that
>one woman's passionate, almost crazed eyes completely dominating the
>photo - that image will be with me forever. The portrait of Matisse, with
>its blurred foreground, is another.
>
>On the other hand, one of the last photos in the book, of the leg and
>fist jutting out of the prison cell, was clearly made with a more modern
>lens, and I think it would be weaker if it were less harshly rendered.
>
>-Alexey
>..........................................................................
>Alexey Merz | URL: http://www.webcom.com/alexey | email: alexey@webcom.com
>            | PGP public key: http://pgp5.ai.mit.edu/ | voice:503/494-6840
>            | Transported to a surreal landscape, a young girl kills the
>            | first woman she meets and then teams up with three complete
>            | strangers to kill again.
>            |                    -- TV listing for _The Wizard of Oz_,
>            |                       in the Marin County, Ca., newspaper