Re: [Leica] LUG Subscription

[Edward Kowaleski <edwardkg@umd.umich.edu>]

I'm sorry you are having difficulty with the LUG subscription business.  
I'm not trying to insult your intelligence but some of the protocols in 
e-mail and computer communications are so exacting and pedantic that it 
could drive one to drink.  I make many spelling errors and sometimes that 
also confuses the issue.  I thought I'd try to go to the subscription 
procedure one more time.

1.  Address th e-mail to "majordomo@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us" (do not use the 
quotes). 

2.  Leave the subject blank.  Put nothing in the subject box.

3.  In the body of the e-mail write "subscribe Leica-users"  (again, do 
not use the quotes).

4.  Add nothing else; just send the e-mail.  Their computer will 
automatically pick off your e-mail address from the header and the 
request to subscribe in the body of the text.  It is untouched by human 
hand but if you deviate from this procedure, the system will not work.  
Crazy huh? 

5.  At the risk of beating it to death, the text must read exactly as 
stated above, i.e. "subscribe Leica-user"  -- be sure to include the hyphen.


I think I messed this up several times when I first subscribed.

I may have told you that I bought two of the new M6TTL units.  I also 
bought the new Leica SF20 flash for these units and while I also have 
Metz units, I'm very pleased with the results.  I took a mess of pictures 
over the past weekend and I have been printing for two days.  For me, 
printing is the real joy of photography so I'm always looking for 
equipment that will get all the juice into the negative. I think I'm far 
better with the technical stuff than the artistic vision business.  I "see"
postcard pictures but not the real jucicy stuff that makes great 
photographers.

This past Sunday my wife and I went to a Gordon Parks exhibit that is 
being put on at the Detroit Institute of Art.  It was absolutely marvellous:
they guy sees stuff in common-place circumstances that end up as 
brilliant pictures,  I love to see stuff like this because I hope that 
some of the imitation will rub off on me.  I have no pride: I can copy 
and learn from anyone.  His black and white pictures have a richness that 
is born from high contrast printing: he has deep lustery blacks in his 
prints that are off set by whites so you visualize that tones in between.

I guess we saw about three hundred prints, most of which were real 
winners.  I wonder how many prints and negatives he had to throw into the 
slop bucket to get those?  The problem is that his "throw-aways" are 
probably the sort of things I'd consider as gem perfect and keep and, 
importantly, then quite and not push further.  I sometimes find great 
pain in wanting to make great pictures that never quite seem to get there.

See you next month.  Let me know how the LUG works out (I did tell you 
that there is a lot of nonsense on the LUG that you have to sift through, 
didn't I?).  All the best, Ed.