Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/01/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ted - you make a significant point here. I totally understand Mark's concerns for "satisfying" the equipment requirements of the client, art director, editor, etc.. Working my way through college at a commercial photo studio I saw it every day. "You need it on 120 chrome; I'll deliver it on 120 chrome. You need it on 4x5 chrome; I'll deliver it on 4x5 chrome; 8x10 chrome - fine." Those same art directors not only want to choose your equipment for you; they want you to have the "right" studio and assistants for their entertainment; they provide the drawing for the photo illustration; they tell you how to frame the shot; prop the shot; etc. These are the main reasons I became a graphic designer / photographer ? in order to work client direct ? art direct my own concepts ? choose and use the appropriate equipment to accomplish the concept. I still have most of the gear from chasing the ever elusive carrot of perfect film format (now sensor format). It certainly worked well enough to earn a decent enough living (most of the time). However, at this point in my aging career, it did not leave me with the life-time portfolio I envisioned at age 20. I didn't say, "no thank you" often enough. I didn't pursue enough of the work that spoke to my heart. I truly wish I would have remained a tad truer to my own personal aesthetic vision (and concomitant equipment requirements) to achieve much more personal goals. My original love of 35mm documentary work has suffered a bit over the decades; due to developing these other format skills and chasing fleeting market style affairs. At the same time I truly appreciate the depth of experience that I've acquired with all formats from 35mm through 12x20 view camera work (and for the past decade - digital); Ideally the power of our unique vision should drive the art directors, editors, agents or clients to us; not the other way around; even though reality may seem to work against that idea. Those we most respect (the greats of any particular photo genre) did it their way, with their chosen format, and the art directors and editors bent to those creator's superior visions. We (who seek to earn our keep with photography) must constantly ask ourselves, "Do I want this job if it's not in synch with my way of seeing and/or working? Do I want to become what the art director (editor, agent, client) wants me to become? or Do I want realize my own vision?" A life goes by very quickly. Whatever size film or sensor resides in our camera?we mostly need to create photographs which we're proud of? we need to constantly show our work?we need to license the images and sell prints ? if we can ? though I'm not at all sure we need to buy a new camera or lens to achieve what's truly photographically important to us. So very many of those we consider great achieved their vision with very limited amounts of gear. They made simple choices (Avedon's 8x10, Cartier-Bresson's 35 with 50mm, Arbus's square, etc.) learned it and worked it - day in and day out. Some days - I wish I'd done that. Other days - I love playing in my too-large toy box. ;~) Big prints impress because they're big. Great photographs impress because they're great photographs - whatever size they're printed at. Great photographs; printed large can, of course, take your breath away. Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist On Jan 14, 2010, at 10:12 AM, tedgrant at shaw.ca wrote: > he'd already made all the accolades about how fantastic the > photography quality was and I could be sure they'd be calling me > again. :-) > > They didn't! ;-) I just figured their loss!