Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/11

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Another Leica vs medium format debate
From: bfranson@greennet.net (Bill Franson)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 23:43:50 +0000

When I read your post Tina I thought it sounded about right. But then the
large format images of Nicholas Nixon's, especially in SCHOOL, came to
mind. Except for the obvious image ratio and tonality I don't think his
photographs come across as "large format". His images have a lightness
about them. A just in time quality. Capturing impressions. Not a formal
look that one usually associates with large format. Then I remembered that
once upon a time all photography was large format. Does that mean that
until 35mm came along there weren't any images that were "truthful
impressions of the world"? Or if there were they weren't great? I wouldn't
want to defend that one.


Bill Franson


At 05:06 PM 08/11/1999 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Check out the newest PHOTO Techniques.  There is an article titled "Truth 
>and Beauty: The Gestalt of Small vs. Large Format"  by Mike Johnston.  It's 
>very good and very true.  Read the whole article, but the final observation 
>is:  "Great 35mm pictures are truthful impressions of the world: records, 
>observations, or reports of reality.....Great large-format photographs 
>express an individual's consciousness, and feelings and ideas about form, 
>beauty, and spirit."  I contend that 35mm can also accomplish what is 
>ascribed to large-format, but large-format cannot accomplish what is 
>ascribed to 35mm.  Comments?
>
>Leically,
>
>Tina
>
>
>Tina Manley,  ASMP
>
>http://www.tinamanley.com
>