Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/10/09

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

To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: Emotive lenses
From: "Craig W. Shier" <shier@mnsinc.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 06:37:24 -0400


>I disagree with that policy and think it doesn't serve the public, he's
>sticking to it, he owns the magazine, and that's why it looks like he loves
>everything. Sort of self-fulfilling.
>
>BTW, I think he's a lousy glamor photographer, (mediocre models in pained
>poses) and his recent criticism of the SI swimsuit issue was the height of
>blindness, not to mention irony.
>
>===========
>Eric Welch
>Grants Pass, OR
>

I have to agree with the above.  I'm rather fond of shutterbug (as compared
to Pop photo or Petersen's) but it has its limitations.  e.g. Shell's
contribution to the F5 review in 11/96 issue was done without shooting a
frame.  You get better data off the Nikon web page.
And as for glamour?  I don't want to get in trouble by saying what I think.
"Lousy" is appropriate.

I do enjoy Roger Hick's columns.  He uses mostly older Leicas, bought used.
He has a low key approach that encourages creativity and his images are
accessible.  By that I mean, I can read his articles and say to myself, "I
could do that if I'm careful."  Some guys (e.g. Galen Rowell) go for a glitz
which is eyecatching but unrepeatable.  For example, I'm never going to
rapell into an antipodean ice cave with an N90 to test the flash.
Craig W. Shier
shier@mnsinc.com