Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/14

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

Subject: [Leica] re: digital treadmill
From: kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour)
Date: Sat Jan 14 17:56:08 2006
References: <BFEF0FDC.ADB4%bdcolen@comcast.net>

On Jan 14, 2006, at 6:30 PM, B. D. Colen wrote:

> I'm going to stick my neck way out here, Steve (and slide a wicker  
> hamper
> under it :-) -
> Yes, I think I am doing better work now than I did in the past.  
> Part of that
> has to do with the fact that I am shooting much more than I was. I  
> was not
> in a financial position to just bang away at my own work - as  
> opposed to
> commissioned work. Film costs money. Processing costs money. (Yes,  
> I know I
> could do my own processing, and I could buy bulk film - which I  
> did). But I
> have found digital extremely freeing, both financially and  
> artistically.
>
> I find that digital gives me an image by image, rather than roll by  
> roll,
> choice of color v black and white. I was never particularly fond of  
> color
> negative film, and wasn't thrilled with conversions to black and  
> white.
> Digital, on the other hand, gives me better color, far, far more  
> easily
> adjusted and balanced, and gives me black and whites that look like  
> what I
> shot on black and white film.
>
> No, I'm not thrilled with the noise in shadows, but I'm getting  
> used to it.
> I know that there are those who say 'why get used to it  when you  
> can use
> film?' And the answer is "because it is part of what is now main  
> stream
> photography."  If I was really bothered by it, I'd go with Canon  
> and get
> smoother, cleaner results at iso 1600 than I got with the best 400  
> iso film.
> But I'm not all that thrilled with the overly clean Canon look -  
> probably
> because I grew up on Tri-X.
>
> Now, am I as comfortable with my DSLR as I was with my M6s? No, I'm  
> not. I
> love the feel of the Ms. I love the rangefinder framing. And there is
> absolutely no question that the latest Leica M glass had virtually  
> no peers.
> That said, my DSLR is every bit as quiet as my M6, and I do like its
> ergonomics. The lenses? Some are up to Leica quality, some aren't.  
> But all
> give me images that I can be proud of as frequently as my Ms did.
>
> So am I giving up something to get something? Yes, I suppose I am.  
> I'm given
> up the feel of the Ms - and I am giving up those fast prime lenses;  
> I've
> never been a zoom guy, and I've had to adapt to that. But life is  
> about
> tradeoffs, so why wouldn't I expect photography to be?
>
> The bottom line, as always, is the results. And I'm willing to be  
> that were
> I not now known as the ultimate Leica apostate ;-), I could be  
> posting the
> black and white images I've been posting, telling everyone I shot  
> them with
> my M6, and no one would question me.
>
> Finally, none of this means that someone else shouldn't be shooting  
> film. If
> it does what you want it to do, and if money isn't an object - and  
> if you
> don't have to turn results around quickly - why not keep shooting  
> film until
> there's no film to shoot?


BD...  no need for the wicker hamper ( very French  ;-) ) as expected  
a wonderful and thoughtful answer...perhaps lacking a bit of the  
passion I felt when you first reported on your use of the 28 ASPH on  
an M...

but its all about tradeoffs.

For me and I own and use several terrific digital slr's... I still  
get a bigger charge (and better photos) using wonderful leica glass,  
on an M or an R, taking my time and shooting film...so no surprise I  
keep coming back to that. But then I do it for fun, I don't have to  
make a living (thank God) from my photos... so why not relax and  
enjoy it...

and I still use the auto everythings when I have to have the speed  
and the special features...

Steve

>
> B. D.
>
>
> On 1/14/06 6:19 PM, "Steve Barbour" <kididdoc@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 14, 2006, at 3:52 PM, B. D. Colen wrote:
>>
>>> I spent about 40-45 years shooting film. But from the point at  
>>> which I
>>> realized that not only does digital give me more convenience than
>>> film, but
>>> it also expands my photographic 'reach,' I haven't thought about
>>> going back
>>> to film. Sure, once and a while I'll shoot a roll. But each time I
>>> do, I end
>>> up asking myself, 'now why did I do this? What has it given me that
>>> digital
>>> can't?
>>
>> Hi BD, I believe that most of us wound up here ie. on the LUG  'cus
>> of Leica lenses , cameras, and film...and we insisted that was God's
>> way, and was better than the alternatives.
>> Are you saying that you now get better photos with digital than you
>> can get with Leica lenses, cameras, and film ? Are there compromises?
>> Are you giving up something to get something else ?
>>
>> This is my dilemma, perhaps yours, and a lot of other photographers
>> here...
>>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>>   And why can't I do as much with film as I can with digital?' Sure,
>>> long-term storage of images requires paying attention to technology
>>> changes
>>> and making sure that one doesn't get two generations behind when
>>> technology
>>> changes. And, no, I'm not great at cataloguing my images - but then
>>> I wasn't
>>> very good at cataloguing my negs either as I am definitely an ADD
>>> and I am
>>> lousy with detailed, boring work. But that's no different with
>>> digital.
>>>
>>> But if anyone else sees digital as a microwave, and gets better
>>> results with
>>> film - keep your microwave.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/14/06 3:05 PM, "David Rodgers" <drodgers@casefarms.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> A year ago I was convinced I'd never shoot film again. Right now
>>>> all I'm
>>>> shooting is film. So much for absolutes.
>>>>
>>>> In my kitchen I have a microwave and a gas range. My high-tech
>>>> microwave
>>>> is like a DSLR. I use it a lot because I'm so busy with other  
>>>> things.
>>>> But it's not my favorite way to cook.
>>>>
>>>> DaveR
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Douglas Nygren [mailto:dnygr@cshore.com]
>>>> Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2006 8:30 AM
>>>> To: lug@leica-users.org
>>>> Subject: [Leica] re: digital treadmill
>>>>
>>>> Nathan and Tina,  Your points are well taken. I'm not 100% for or
>>>> against. I react more to those who wax over digital than to  
>>>> those who
>>>> defend film.
>>>>
>>>> Tina mentions sending images over the internet. I like doing that.
>>>>
>>>> Nathan and others note that people have kept the photos from the
>>>> past,
>>>> but not the negatives. Others note they have the photos and  
>>>> negatives
>>>> from the past.
>>>>
>>>> Someone else noted enjoying getting the instant feedback on the  
>>>> photo
>>>> taken. That's true, but there is also a lot of enjoyment when you
>>>> develop your film and see how it all came out. The key word is
>>>> enjoyment.
>>>>
>>>> Then again, since I use fast film at slow speeds, I don't enjoy
>>>> taking
>>>> the film through airports and x-ray machines. Maybe I'll take my
>>>> digital camera with me the next time I go to Europe, but then I  
>>>> do a
>>>> lot of panoramic work and where do I find a digital, panoramic
>>>> camera?
>>>>
>>>> Doug
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more  
>>>> information
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


In reply to: Message from bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] re: digital treadmill)