Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/09/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I think you can have too many images. Value and appreciation go with scarcity. The family pictures I find most compelling are the few surviving oldest ones, from 1875 in my case. They let your imagination get to work much more than the larger quantity of snapshots from even 50 years ago. It's sort of like radio vs. TV drama, or listening to a symphony on a very poor speaker. Your imagination fills in the gaps and brings you closer to the event. Regards, Dick On Sep 18, 2009, at 9:25 AM, David Rodgers wrote: > Jan, > > Nice images! > > I only shoot BW film in 120. For color I use digital. I like using > Rolleiflexes because I like waist level viewing. I seem to compose > better images on ground glass. Rollei's are quiet, solidly built, and > they're attention grabbers (which can be good or bad, depending on the > situation). > > Processing film is so much work I sometimes wonder why I bother. But > each time I force myself to use it I discover some rewards. Down the > road I may be thankful that I'm still mixing in some film shooting > these > days. If I stay away too long I lose touch with developing. Even one > roll a month is enough to keep me up to speed on the details. > > I feel comfortable that film is archival. No special tools to look > back > through your own personal history. Just a light source and the ability > to visualize inversely. Negs have their own special beauty. If you > don't > handle them now and then, it's easy to forget. I particularly like big > negs. The bigger the better. > > I've always liked square format. I probably got hooked when I saw the > first picture I ever took with my parent's Brownie Hawkeye. Speaking > of > which, I have handful of prints from that camera that are extremely > meaningful, even to this day. Is it possible to take too many > pictures, > and thus dilute the value that fewer might have? > > Dave R > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+drodgers=casefarms.com at leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+drodgers=casefarms.com at leica-users.org] On > Behalf Of > Jan Decher > Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 7:58 PM > To: lug at leica-users.org > Subject: [Leica] Where the Rolleiflex shines... > > Dave, > I feel just the same about Rolleiflex images. See some stuff on my > Flickr > pages: > http://www.flickr.com/photos/mittelformat/sets/72157600205838879/ > Still have to upload this summer's stuff from England and Germany. > Are you on the Rollei Users Group? > > For me B&W is clearly all about 6x6 Rollei. With color negs & slides > Leica > brilliance wins. > > I use digital mostly for my (zoological) work and from a > price-performance > reasoning it will most likely be the new Canon 7D. Canon got a lot of > things right with that one (finally a decent viewfinder & built in > external > flash slave control all at 18 MP!). > Don't really need video in an SLR but it's nice for the occasional > animal > action sequence. > Jan > > ====From: "David Rodgers" <drodgers at casefarms.com> > ... > Every time I use a Rolleiflex I mutter how "only 12 frames per roll" > can > be limiting." (No 220 for me!). Then I look at the results and > wonder if > it's just the opposite. There's a mysterious beauty in square BW negs > that are just big enough you can appreciate the contact prints without > the aid of a loupe. Not to mention enlargements, which shouldn't stand > up to digital prints, but somehow do and then some. > Maybe it's the level of effort it takes to get the end result that > makes > me appreciate them so. Either that or Leica doesn't have a monopoly on > mystique :-). > ... > Dave R > > _______________________________________________ > 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