[Leica] IMG: in focus and I like it? ;-)

[faneuil at gmail.com (Eric Korenman)]

here is one vote for the first one (the "overexposed" one by Mark's
reckoning)
It just looks.. better

Eric

On 8/1/07, Philippe Orlent <philippe.orlent@pandora.be> wrote:
>
> Marc,
>
> You measured it right. About one and a third stop if you follow the
> books of the zone system (exposing for skin, that is).
> So, I think (hope) that you will like this version more:
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/phorlent/_POR0887_2.jpg.html>
>
> Honestly, I don't know which one of both is to be considered best.
> They both have pros and cons. Personally, I still prefer the first
> version.
> The first one was a search for something different, though. A queeste
> for a personal signature or an approach to photography. No intention
> of over idealizing kids at all.
> More like an enormous sympathy for their spontaneity.
> It was an experiment, as many of my images are. (See boy with stick...)
>
> Why this queeste? Because lately I find that I'm not evolving in my
> photography. It's not bad, it's a bit of everything (with some bias
> to shots of my own children and close family), and it goes every way
> but one. No consistancy, except for a sort of Esperanto style. A
> Zelig technique. Call it globalized mediocrity, maybe. The Marketing
> Style... And I'm not the only one with that problem, BTW.
> I know that, had no problem with it (I'm not that long really
> seriously into doing photography myself: 5 years or so. Thus, so many
> more years to come...) until recently and now I'm trying to do
> something about it.
> Hence the checking some things with esteemed photographers on this
> list. Reading responses, looking, absorbing and trying to respond to
> what seems interesting to me.
> Hence the experimenting (and partially because of you*) with light,
> but also subject, theme, ...
> Trying different approaches (and there's a lot of stuff I don't
> show), and always in combination with PS.
> Hence my sometimes a bit grotesque defense of new technology. And
> love for old.
>
> Why with PS? Because it's the most important evolution in photography
> of the last decade. (IMO)
>
> Before PS, one had some control over the final image. Within several
> boundaries, a lot was possible. But there was always technique
> limiting the outcome.
> The strange thing is that, within these limits, photographic quality
> was a lot better than it is today. Technique was 'limited', but there
> was so much more personality in the photographs themselves.
> The Avedon discussion (*that's were you come in) made me realize
> that. Although I find Eric's children portraits extremely beautiful
> (whatever zone they're in), and although I perfectly understood the
> reference he made to Avedon, your description of Avedon's
> working process made me have a deeper look into his work. Only to
> discover that he sure knew how to create an image (which is more than
> a photograph for me). He used photography to realize this image,
> within its technical limits. But what a signature! What a mark he
> made! And he was not the only one: my (pre PS era) Phaidon 'Photo
> Book' is full of them. I dived into a Dutch Commercial Photography
> Award book of 21 years ago: same thing. Splendid photography, page
> after page.
> Why was this photography so special? Because these people
> experimented, and often created images that suggested more than
> reality. Or created a new one. Or interpreted it in a unique way.
>
> Imagine where these men and women could have gone if at that time
> they had PS at their hand: a tool that gives you almost unlimited
> control over technique ?nd reality.
>
> Before PS It was impossible to 'trick' an image in an invisible way.
> If you wanted to do something special, you had to have an idea, and
> you had to have 'a' technique.
> But all this has been done, in an enormous variety, in the last
> century. And that century is over now, for 7 years already.
> Why not combine that 'old' creativity with PS? It would lead to
> something entirely new. Or at least to an evolution.
>
> Strangely enough, PS is mostly used to recreate styles that have been
> done before. Or to create Marketing photography.
> IMO that's a shame.
>
> So I'm just experimenting, until I find how to make my work into
> 'something else' -for everybody. Chances are big that I'll be
> experimenting until the end of my days :-)
> After all, it's a kind of new Interbellum. And isn't that the perfect
> time for that?
>
> Philippe
>
> PS: written with all due respect for photojournalism and documentary
> photography. And for honesty in photography.
>
>
>
> Op 1-aug-07, om 13:27 heeft Mark Rabiner het volgende geschreven:
>
> >> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/phorlent/_POR0887.jpg.html>
> >>
> >> C&C welcomed and appreciated.
> >> Thanks for looking,
> >> Philippe
> >>
> >
> >
> > Its the new "over exposed kid look".
> >
> > I'm not getting it!?! More than a full stop over exposed!! Or done
> > in post
> > processing. Why over idealize our kids? Why wash them out?
> > The kids got a whole life in front of him before he goes to heaven!
> > Lets not
> > put him there too soon!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Mark William Rabiner
> > Harlem, NY
> >
> > rabinergroup.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>