Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/06/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Are we anal puddle jumpers or what? Mark
From: philippe.amard at sfr.fr (philippe.amard)
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 21:22:14 +0200
References: <CC06437E.1FEA9%mark@rabinergroup.com>

Sorry Mark, on the fly is different - would translate as "? la vol?e",  
"en passant" or "au passage, or "ce faisant", "dans le m?me temps",  
"en mouvement", etc
A la sauvette is really different -  the connotations are lost in  
translation, another film I enjoyed a lot BTW

ph


Le 19 juin 12 ? 20:55, Mark Rabiner a ?crit :

> "A la sauvette" translates directly to "On the fly".
> A guy I read said idiomatically for us it meant doing snap shots.  
> Working
> fast.
>
> Which to me suggested the direct opposite of "decisive moment".
> Which sounds very precious.  and concisely planned.
>
> - - from my iRabs.
> Mark Rabiner
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/
>
>
>> From: Philippe Amard <philippe.amard at sfr.fr>
>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:45:34 +0200
>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Are we anal puddle jumpers or what?
>>
>> Just for your information the original title in French is NOT the
>> decisive moment,
>>  it is "A la sauvette"
>> which probably doesn't translate well
>> but conveys the idea that permission was not granted,
>> and that the action was probably swift so that surrounding people
>> wouldn't notice it;
>> cf. end of video #2  of HCB hopping along on the streets of Paris and
>> shooting by instinct,
>> sometimes nearly bumping into passers-by to get the shot.
>> REM: He'd get a new set of teeth everyday if he were to try this
>> nowadays ...
>>
>> VDO
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqsOYsZlPX4
>> Photography for him is a "way/means for drawing" or "to keep a  
>> diary".
>> He says he would have much fun shooting without film in the camera
>> were it not for the urgency to communicate and bring testimonies of
>> the world as it is.
>>
>> "We steal, we're picpockets" ...
>>
>> Insists a lot on his background as a painter, and some of his masters
>>
>> @4'50 "I have a passion for geometry" (look at his hand movements  
>> then)
>>
>> MORE HERE
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjjGiBUaf4s&feature=relmfu
>>
>> some references to gear - asked he says there's no recipe, he sets  
>> the
>> shudder speed at 1/125 and knows about the rest by instinct - the
>> Leica is just there because of its format (last seconds) prefered  
>> over
>> the square ... his pet lens is a 50mm, the other two are used only on
>> assignments.
>>
>> Some form of contradiction though : in the first document he states
>> that the photog should be neutral, or at least be immersed into the
>> other's culture (referring to China then) whereas in the second he
>> states that the photog's - read his - point of view can conflict with
>> that of the magazine's editors (in the lay-out for instance) ...
>>
>> Hope this didn't bother anyone.
>> Bien cordialement de Metz, Lorraine
>> Philippe, back to flowers due to the shortage of poodles today.
>>
>>
>> Le 19 juin 12 ? 17:23, B. D. Colen a ?crit :
>>
>>> I've been reading this thread and have a couple thoughts:
>>> 1. Equipment: Of course equipment is important, it was important to
>>> HCB,
>>> it's important to all of us today. It is not, however, the be all
>>> and end
>>> all many endless discussions of micro contrast, glass, and pixels
>>> would lead
>>> one to believe. Someone yesterday or today made the comment that
>>> today's
>>> photographers keep upgrading their equipment, and need to, if they  
>>> are
>>> serious about their craft. Well, yes, but what isn't mentioned is  
>>> that
>>> today's camera body is not simply the light-tight box bodies were 20
>>> years
>>> ago, but it is the box AND the film. That is, today a photographer  
>>> is
>>> required to upgrade equipment with some frequency because digital
>>> sensors
>>> are still evolving, just as film evolved over a period of many
>>> decades. So
>>> in order to be able to meet client and publishing standards, a
>>> photographer
>>> is required to upgrade. But the photographer who bought a pair of
>>> M3s in the
>>> 1950s, did NOT have to upgrade his bodies ? EVER ? if he didn't beat
>>> them to
>>> death. The photographer did, however, upgrade her film.  But the
>>> Nikon or
>>> Canon glass from 20 years ago is plenty good to shoot with it today.
>>> So, for
>>> that matter, are Leica's first generation aspheric lenses plenty
>>> good today.
>>> If someone wants the latest $7k Summicron, good for them. But there
>>> is no
>>> NEED to make that upgrade.
>>> 2. Analism: Anal is as anal does. HCB was not the film era
>>> equivalent of a
>>> pixel peeper. He did not wear a loupe around his neck for counting
>>> eyelashes. He was an artist who cared most about composition, and
>>> the ways
>>> in which visual elements came together and played off each other.
>>> Counting
>>> facial hairs is not photography, and really has little to do with
>>> photography. Does a particular lens effectively suppress veiling
>>> flare when
>>> shooting with strong backlighting? That is important to a
>>> photographer,
>>> because it effects her ability to successful capture a given image.
>>> But
>>> being able to examine a pimple on the face of the man in the moon in
>>> a night
>>> shot of lower Manhattan? Not so much.
>>> 3. HCB and how many times he pushed the shutter release: Yes, HCB  
>>> shot
>>> thousands of frames we have and will never seen. But don't kid
>>> yourselves
>>> that this somehow means that he, or similar 'giants' weren't as good
>>> as
>>> we've been lead to believe. The question is not, did he shoot
>>> thousands of
>>> frames he discarded? Rather, it is how good are his keepers, how to
>>> they
>>> compare to everyone else's keepers, and how many of them are there?
>>> We all,
>>> in our life times of shooting, may come up with one or two HCB-like
>>> images.
>>> What we will never come up with are the hundreds he produced.
>>> 4. Was the Puddle Jumper posed, and does it matter: As I said
>>> before, and I
>>> gather various people's searches have indicated I am correct, that
>>> image was
>>> an unposed one-off. But some people have suggested over the last
>>> couple of
>>> days that it's the outcome that matters, 'art is art,' and we
>>> shouldn't care
>>> if it was posed. I vehemently disagree. Because if that, or other
>>> supposedly
>>> unposed images were posed, it tells us that HCB was a completely
>>> different
>>> kind of artist from what we thought he was. Philippe Halsman, a
>>> wonderful
>>> Magnum Photographer, made jumping his gimmick. He produced terrific
>>> images
>>> of everyone from Richard Nixon to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor
>>> jumping on
>>> command. But Philippe Halsman was not HCB. He was not a chronicler
>>> of the
>>> "decisive moment." He is not noted for creating incredibly composed
>>> images
>>> of moments in real life and real time; HCB is. If it turns out that
>>> HCB
>>> posed images ? and I am NOT suggesting, nor do I believe, that he
>>> posed
>>> anything other than some portraits, then he simply was not the
>>> photographer
>>> we thought he was and his work needs to be reconsidered. (When Bruce
>>> Davidson's Outside Inside came out, I went to hear him speak at  
>>> Boston
>>> University. During a rambling discourse he said that he ALWAYS asked
>>> permission before photographing his subjects. IF that is true, I
>>> think his
>>> work needs to be reconsidered. He still is a brilliant photographer,
>>> but IF
>>> that's true, he is more a brilliant fashion-type photographer, than
>>> the
>>> documentarian he has been thought to be. (I must note here that I
>>> have heard
>>> from a number of sources I trust, and concluded myself from listen
>>> to him,
>>> that age has really caught up with Davidson's mental faculties, and
>>> I would
>>> NOT take his saying he always  asked permission as reliable
>>> testimony.)
>>> 5. The Decisive Moment: For all the talk about the Decisive Moment,
>>> and the
>>> idea many have that HCB saw these special moments flash before his
>>> eye and
>>> grabbed them,  I would contend that the true decisive moment is that
>>> instant
>>> in which he ? or anyone ? saw or sees the photographic possibilities
>>> in a
>>> scene, a situation, and THEN begins to work that scene, until all  
>>> the
>>> compositional elements come together. With the anal puddle jumper,  
>>> the
>>> decisive moment would have been that instant when HCB saw the hole
>>> in the
>>> fence, realized what was going on, and started shooting. All of
>>> which to say
>>> that the fulfillment of genius requires hard work.
>>> Back to anal puddle jumping. :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


Replies: Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Are we anal puddle jumpers or what? Mark)
In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Are we anal puddle jumpers or what?)