Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/06/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I always thought it to mean unposed and unnoticed by the subject, with the shutter being tripped at a good instant. Good instinct + experience? As for the equipment drift (drift being an evolutionary term), everyone on this list could do extremely well with a 50ish Jupiter at f/4. Or a Sigma P&S. I don't mean to be an iconoclast, but good is good enough if you are shooting Bresson/Capa genre. Sent from my iPad Jeffery L. Smith New Orleans, Louisiana USA On Jun 19, 2012, at 19:10, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > Tell us what the connotations ARE please if you have the time!!!?!? > To A la sauvette. > Which google says translates to "on the fly". > As we don't know many French people who are in a position to really tell > us. > And inquiring LugNuts want to know > > - - 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 21:22:14 +0200 >> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Are we anal puddle jumpers or what? Mark >> >> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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