Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/06/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks though this thread did not touch upon gear until the last few posts today. Yesterday and last night till late it was about how a documentary art photographer such as HCB works. Does he get involved with his subjects or not. How the puddle shot was done. What the decisive moment might mean. The introduction of the idea a few hours ago that this has anything to do with gear choices is pretty lame red herring. - - from my iRabs. Mark Rabiner http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ > From: Jefffery Smith <jsmith342 at gmail.com> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 19:35:48 -0500 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Are we anal puddle jumpers or what? Mark > > 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 _______________________________________________ Leica Users > Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information