[Leica] RE: Leica M4-2

[tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant)]

feli offered:
Subject: Re: [Leica] RE: Leica M4-2


> So, Ted, do you think that someone like Eugene Smith, who was notorious 
> for showing up with massive amounts of gear, which he matched to the 
> assignment at hand, and knew every trick in the book as far as printing 
> and developing is concerned, was merely an artsy fartsy dilettante who 
> spent to much time playing with himself, instead of taking great 
> pictures?<<<<<<

Well now feli I don't know that he didn't play with himself at some time or 
other. ;-) But from what I understand of his mannerisms while shooting I bet 
he shot away without a single thought of just how accurate the viewfinder 
was in the heat of battle or any assignment where fast moving people and 
action was concerned.

> I know you have been doing this professionally for 50 years, but I do not 
> understand why you seemingly always dismiss any technical or artistic 
> ambition, beyond lining up the blinking lights in the viewfinder as 
> amateurish flim flam.<<<<<<<<<,

Well I don't dismiss it as flim flam, I just don't understand what the hell 
the big deal is whether a view finder is 5 things or ten. As the only thing 
you need to truly understand is the viewfinder lines that fit the lens 
you're using is the one your eye is concentrating on .

And the only time I figure the Leica viewfinder was a big pain in the ass 
for me was when I bought the 75mm 1.4 Summilux and constantly had a problem 
with how it showed up in the view finder.  And although I was very pleased 
with the way it cut film .... it drove me crazy everytime the viewfinder 
allowed me to "cut off partial heads" simply because the damn viewfinder was 
so crammed with confusion. So the lens was sold dirt cheap to get rid of it.

Otherwise I've flown with the viewfinders as they were, 72's for a very long 
long time until I bought new M7's. And Tom Abrahamsson showed me the 
differences between 58 - 72 - 85 viewfinders and now we own 3 M7's with 
those viewfinders. Oh yeah and couple of M6's with the '72!  And you know 
what?  Lots of time I have the lenses all screwed-up and just shooting away 
until I look and ... "Oops got the wrong lens on the wrong camera. ;-)  "Oh 
shit,  keep shooting sort them out later!" :-)

So you see this kind of technical stuff you get so all worked up about is a 
no brainer simply because my success in photography still comes down to..... 
"Am I getting the right picture moment on film?". And if that's the case and 
the work is being published and or people keep calling me to shoot for them, 
I suppose the view finder situation will just have to wait until I'm a very 
tired old man with nothing better to do with my photo life than be concerned 
about the size of a rangefinder viewfinder!


>>>I do not see how it is possible to
> achieve the best work possible, if you have not mastered the tools and 
> technical skills of your craft. If you do not do so I do not see how it is 
> possible for you to achieve the best of ones artistic ability and over 
> come any difficulties one will encounter in the field.<<<<<<

feli mon ami, I suppose one can put my ability and your concern that I do 
what I do without understanding all the techie stuff to...........

My photo life has been just plain old fashion bull shit luck! :-)  You see, 
the less you know about all the techie stuff, the less you have to be 
concerned with when your gut tells you ..... "SHOOT IDIOT!"  And I do! :-) 
I mean it's kinda worked like that for a very long-time and at this late 
time in my life I really don't need a bunch of technical stuff screwing up 
what I see and re-act to. :-)

It's KISS and all about seeing, gut feeling and "SHOOT IDIOT!" :-)

ted