Re: [Leica] Mike's Ten Books

["Alan Hull" <hull@vaggeryd.mail.telia.com>]

. 
Mike Johnstone wrote.
> Most people think they can "get" photographs by glancing at them. 
However, it isn't true. 

Exactly what I've been saying in previous posts.  But with a minor
difference.  For me, a photograph must be sharp and clear as a bell from
wall to wall, corner to corner.  When I look at a photograph, I want to
climb in it, and look around.  I can't do that with fuzzy out of focus
backgrounds, bokah or not.  For that reason I consider the like of the
Noctilux with its narrow DOF to be the lens for record shots only.  An
image of a flower surrounded by a blurry fuzz is good only for a gardening
catalogue.  A portrait with a sharp pair of eyes and out of focus nose and
ears is good for the Opticians Gazzette.  

Before oil and canvas artists were chased by photography into the realm of
the unrealistic they always depicted the whole scene sharply and clearly. 
It was possible to stand before a painting for hours and still see scenes
within scenes second and third time around.  

Any part of a photograph that is out of focus is a reflection of poor and
lazy technique and is of no value whatever.  It is a waste of chemicals.

This is the reason why photographs can be "got" in seconds.  After "taking
in" the main subject so THOUGHTFULLY isolated from the rest of the scene,
there is nothing else to look at.  Whether the viewer wanted to explore the
rest of the picture or not, he is left with a sadness of what might have
been.

IMHO if a lens is set below f8 it is in record mode. Period.

Alan Hull