[Leica] re: Exposure and Development

[robertmeier at usjet.net (Robert Meier)]

Ted,

I have to  agree -- as long as you don't see any difference, then there's no 
need to worry over technical matters like incident or reflected, film 
speeds, etc.   And the internet has increased the amount of information 
available tremendously.  So, why worry?  Just take good pictures!

Robert

>
>> Thanks very much.   You are a fount of wisdom.   Did you find any 
>> difference when you switched from using incident readings with the white 
>> ball to using reflected readings with the R cameras?<<<<<<<<<<,
>
> I never thought of anything like that as the camera was set and what came 
> out looked OK. Therefore no need to have a concern nor problem.
>
>> And, by the way, when Kodak eliminated the 'safety factor' and doubled 
>> the published ratings for Tri-X (and other films) in the early 60's , did 
>> you start giving your pictures one stop less exposure?<<<<<<,
>
> Honestly I didn't know they'd done that until you just told me. See things 
> like this, if I didn't see a major difference in how negatives or slides 
> looked when changes were made, it never concerned me.
>
> Sure I read camera magazine articles, but in most cases I never took any 
> of it seriously. I might read something where a point was made, load a 
> camera bang off a roll and look see. If I didn't see any significant 
> change..... end of article concern. Next assignment was waiting to be 
> done.
>
> Yes I know very well I've been very lucky over the years when "advances" 
> happened and other photographers made changes accordingly. But I was far 
> more interested in every thought and action devoted to "shooting 
> assignments." I gave very little thought to the technical items you've 
> asked about.
>
> Obviously I must have made changes without realizing I was doing them as 
> film, paper and developers were modified, but I stand by what I say. My 
> interest in the technical aspects during all the film years, now the digi, 
> is "minimum is best and shooting is better!" Obviously as long as I 
> achieve results I'm pleased and surprised with and the client is happy to 
> pay for it's not likely at this stage am I going to get techie. The least 
> I can get a way with the better! :-)
>
> If we consider much of what we read today and are involved with the 
> technical side, it's because of the internet. It means there's far more 
> information instantly available compared to 40-50 years ago where what you 
> learned was in a .50 cent photo magazine.
>
> An example of today. A question comes up about a lens......... and 50 
> people respond instantly with more details than one can absorb! What's 
> more confusing is, many of the posts almost contradict each other, this is 
> due to the experiences of the users or the type of photography they do.
>
> In the old days one might read an article about a 50mm lens, that was it! 
> Maybe a month later you'd see a question or two in the "letter's to the 
> editor" column. Which were answered by some "expert" paid by the magazine 
> to say the right things not to offend the lens manufacture being 
> discussed! ;-)
>
> I think in the olden days it was far more "we learned by doing," than 
> reading a screen and asking questions for an instant answer.
>
> ted
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>