Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/11/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Jim Nichols offered: Subject: Re: [Leica] 80 Summilux R (was 'Am I being stupid? (R content)') > Thanks for the advice, Ted. I can only speak from my experience with > family members, and from comments from my late father-in-law, who had a > small studio where he shot 5x7 negatives in B&W, and retouched the > negatives with very sharp pencils. He knew how to get return business > from his female customers, which was to make them look good. ;-)<<<< Hi Jim, Aaaaahhhh the good old days of 5X7 film portraits, negative retouching with the lightness of a feather to skin! :-) One thing I never learned to do, retouching! Because, apart from the 4X5 size of the Speed Graphic the largest film size I ever exposed, always news events not requiring retouching. The rest of the career was 2 1/4, predominantly 35mm. The one time I tried retouching I ended with a transformation from a pretty looking young woman almost to a Boris Karloff monster. Game over forget this stuff. :-) Today however in photography, it appears most photos, studio or street are crispy sharp compared to the soft gentle beauties of the bygone eras. It is interesting to visit a friends home and see portraits taken 40-50 years ago or longer and see the "gentle softness" of those days. Created by lens or retouching. Or both! On a few occasions I'd put a clear filter on a lens, rub my finger around my face and forehead which would pick-up some normal skin oil residue and rub it on the filter for a softening effect of sorts. I know of some folks who'd smear Vaseline on a filter. To me it was always way to much. But there are some classical ladies of age today who like to have the youthful touch in softening the character of a few wrinkles. Or shall we say, "the beauty of aging !" :-) cheers, ted From: <tedgrant at shaw.ca> > To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> > Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 12:18 PM > Subject: Re: [Leica] 80 Summilux R (was 'Am I being stupid? (R content)') > > >> Jim Nicchols offered: >>>"Mark, >>> >>>It sounds like you don't shoot many portraits of women, else you would >>>also >>>add that the portrait lens cannot be razor sharp in all details. This is >>>why older lenses find favor with those who specialize in this >>>market.<<<<<<, >> >> And Mark in rebuttal offered: >>>>>I shot mainly women and after a while diffused none of them and had no >>>>>"old" >>> glass to use on them. >>> I just image Googled Karsh (who did photography quite a few women), and >>> Penn, and Avedon and the gals were just as sharp as the guys. Karsh's >>> shot of >> < George Bernard Shaw seems a bit soft maybe from what I can >>>see.<<<<<<<< >> >> It didn't make any difference to Karsh... it was sharp, male or female or >> into file 13 which eventually went to the scrap heap.As much as my >> comments about Karsh may have some folks wonder how I can, It's simply >> because his brother Malak and Karsh were friends of mine for a number of >> years. Malak and myself were assigned to work on the same subject in >> photographing the tourist beauties of Canada several times over the >> years. He in one part of the country, I in another. With great sessions >> upon returning comparing each others photography. >> >> I was a guest in both of Karsh's Ottawa studios, the old original on >> Spark's Street and the new one in the Chateau! Assigned to shoot a >> series on his new wife in their home in the suburbs of Ottawa shortly >> after they were married. KARSH without question demanded of the society >> editor he approve any and all pictures before publication. That was >> before he knew I was the photographer for the assignment. And in his >> position he demanded that kind of control from publications and got it. >> >> When I was told this by the editor, I said "forget it, just tell him it's >> me doing the assignment and no he isn't going to approve any of my >> pictures as, "I don't have to approve any of his!" Jokingly of course. >> :-) Editor not knowing we were acquaintances was shocked and near died! I >> of course was being slightly facetious with a smile. So while I was in >> the editors office she called and spoke with KARSH. His response? >> >> "Why didn't you tell me Ted Grant was the photographer and we wouldn't be >> wasting my valuable time now!" >> >> End of KARSH approving any photographs without even seeing them until >> published! :-) Estralita didn't have any problem as she knew me through >> visits and seeing some of my published photos. Wonderful, kind lady to >> shoot with. >> >> But his pictures were sharp regardless the old wives tale of "ladies >> like soft lenses" not to show their wrinkles! Which to some degree >> indicate beautiful character! ! :-) >> >> cheers, >> Dr. ted :-) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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