[Leica] The Future Is Now

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

For those of you who think digital printing is just a passing fancy...

Just went down to Unisom, one of the best B&W processing and printing places
in Boston, to get a half-dozen 16x20s made. Well.....as of August 1, Unisom
is now all digital. No more processing. No more wet printing. Period.

B. D.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of
> Krechtz@aol.com
> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 12:26 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Bokeh vs. Nukeh
>
>
> In a message dated 8/28/00 10:15:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> jbcollier@home.com writes:
>
> << When I started in photography if I needed a lens of a certain
>  focal length, I just bought one. Later I would find myself unconsciously
>  avoiding certain lenses. It was not until I read that infamous Photo
>  Techniques article that I finally understood why I loved my Leica 50 but
>  seldom used my Nikon one. It is amazing how often I will not like a
>  particular photo because of harsh out of focus areas.  >>
>
> Pretty much my story.  It is a matter of preserving the harmony
> and balance
> of the photograph as a whole and minimizing harsh or distracting
> elements.
> Interestingly, as to the Johnston article, before reading it I
> had strongly
> considered buying the Hexar Classic for available light work,
> particularly
> for use in photographing string quartets and similar ensembles in
> performance.  The article's claim that the lens was an effective
> re-creation
> of the 1969 Summicron, with similar visual results, made up my mind.
> Sure enough, the lens mimicked the impression of overall
> lucidity, sharpness
> and definition.  However, every vertical line in photographs made at wide
> apertures had a tendency to appear as a double line.  A friend
> who at that
> time bought the same camera for the same reasons got similar results.  In
> every print, the double lines were obvious, unnatural-looking and
> distracting.
> We both sold the cameras.  I went with Leica.  I assume there are
> those who
> would say my decision was silly, but I simply did not like the
> way my work
> looked, and I was going to considerable trouble and expense to
> get the shots
> and produce the work, hopefully for publication.
> Call it bo-keh, eye poison or chopped liver, for all anyone
> cares.  If it's
> visible in a photograph, for photographic purposes it is genuine.
>  All that
> remains is for each individual to place it in his or her own
> perspective.
> With Leica lenses, it is quite easy to say that bo-keh is either
> a marginal
> issue or no issue, because they do not exhibit negative
> qualities, as a rule.
>  However, they are still not all the same.
> Ideally, anyone who has a fairly clear idea as to how he would
> wish his or
> her photographs to look needs at least to consider the question of out of
> focus area reproduction.  If, however, the predominant concern is
> to meet the
> standards of an editor or the mythical "average viewer", then
> priorities can
> change dramatically.
> Really, it is a matter involving a mixture of aesthetics, economics,
> practicality and other factors.
> I perceive a clear pattern emerging in this thread, highlighting the
> differences in priorities between professional photographers and
> others whom
> I take to have other "day jobs".  It is not necessary to denigrate an
> intellectual or aesthetic concept in order to recognize that
> different Leica
> users have diverging needs and place different demands on
> equipment, just as
> they have different demands placed on them by others.
> Frankly, if my livelihood depended on bringing home the required
> photographic
> images every day, you can bet I would make damn sure I shot first
> and asked
> questions later.  Stopping along the way to agonize over which
> lens to use
> for its aesthetic qualities would be simply out of the question.
> However,
> choosing which one to buy, use and really get to know, that would
> be a matter
> of genuine if not critical importance.
>
> Joe Sobel
>