Re: [Leica] Musings on the role of photography

[Mark Rabiner <mrabiner@concentric.net>]

Alan Hull wrote:
> 
> FrĀn: Khoffberg
> > Ansel's relationships with
> > folks like Stieglitz, Imogen Cunningham, Edward Weston, Paul Strand,
> > and all the rest.
> --------------------------
> I am puzzled why modern photographers revere these old names of the
> distant past.  Their images for the most part are second rate when
> compared to the awesome results produced by many current, known and
> unknown, photographers today.
> "Perhaps its the mistaken belief that the images are good because they
>were made with ancient unmanageable equipment.  Which is ridiculous, of
>course, because an image must stand alone regardless of what or even
>who made it."

What's dumber, putting down these great people or putting down their
classic cameras. Instead of defending my Gods I'll do the nerdy:
Imogen used a Rolleiflex which I used everyday alongside my Leica's and
which I could sell for three times what I bought it for twenty years ago
(but wouldn't dream of doing). This has basically the same lens with a
slightly better coating than my Hasselblad which Adams used the second
half of his career and I used the first half of mine and still use. The
Hasselblad C# has endured an onslaught of Hi tech competition from both
the Japanese as well as RolleiflexSLR. I remains synonymous with the
bulk of professional high end medium format photography done today. If
your not shooting with a Hasselblad you'll need to explain why.
View cameras Proliferate today as the main tool for digital photography.
Camera companies are coming out with viewcameras in the medium format
for shooting both film and digital, rock solid and flexible both. They
remain the most flexible tool for creating quality images out there.
Ironically the archetypal cameras of day one are the cameras of the future.