[Leica] WAS Digest V3 #358, Now light discussion? long!

[tedgrant@islandnet.com (Ted Grant)]

THIS IS LONG FOR ANYONE DOWN LOADING!!!!!!!!!!!

JG wrote:

>Ted,
>
>Where are you coming from with these broad statements, these grand
>philosophical generalizations?>>>>>>>

JG,
I guess my comments come from being a professional news photographer and
photojournalist for 48 years and still shooting! :)

yep I sometimes make broad statements and it kinda generalizes, simplifies
the light situation. But in the case of our conversation it seems your the
only one having what appears to be some kind of difficulty with what I've
put on the screen.

Philosophical?  Nope just experience! :) And that experience comes from
shooting for newspapers, the wire service. magazines and publishing books.
Commercial assignments by the score and more Olympics than I can remember
and with a couple of wars thrown in for good measure.

So you see it has nothing to do with being philosophical, as I don't do
"philosophical stuff!"

>Such as:
>
><<<<<<Actually shooting B&W is more difficult, as you only have 2 things
>going for you: " Light and Content!"  You don't have colours to take up
>the slack if you haven't made a good photograph. :)<<<<<<<<

Well now son, if you can't understand that in B&W you only have 2 elements,
the content and light to work with, I don't know what else I can say to
explain it.

You see when you work in colour you have all the pretty colours to cover
the picture and the content doesn't have to be great.  As most folks
respond to "how beautiful the colour is" and when that happens they really
don't see the content!

How often have you stood with people who are admiring a "beautiful sunset"
and you're there with a camera and haven't taken any pictures?  Why?
Simply because you know the difference between just being a "colour picture
and one with content and colour!"

Now damn have I gone philo...... whatever again? :)

>Or:
><<<<<<<<
>Besides, these days colour neg is used like B&W, then
>scanned,Photo-shopped and beautiful colour!<<<<<<<<<

Well now I guess I over generalized that a bit, as a computer can't make a
dream photo out of a pigs ear of an exposure, but it sure can make a not
bad picture look a hell of a lot better and add some other bits and pieces
to make it a wizard of a shot in the hands of a master Photo Shop artist!

<<<<<Offices, houses, gyms, are not lit like in the old days, and half the
time a shooter is forced to go in under short time requirements, grab a
shot, get out.>>>>>>>>>

Aw gee is that still going on? I thought they had improved the candle lit
gyms and coleman lamp lit offices. :)

>>>>>>>>Naturally, if you're with NGphic and have loads of time and money
>>>>>>>>to set up lights, you can get creative>>>>>>>>

Well your right on that one, although I have to admit I haven't had the NG
luxury too often myself. But have shot on month long or longer assignments
and rarely ever used flash during any of that time.

<<<<<But for most jobs, even the PR jobs I'm assigned, you gotta get in,
get out. Now, back to Adobe, yes, you can use your M and take a portrait in
available light lit by FL, and you can go back, scan it, color
>correct it. But the lack of CONTRAST in the skin tones will require added
>time of lassooing and bumping. And even then it can't fully correct. A good
>pump and bounce of strobe will correct the situation and preclude a lot of
>time on the computer. So where are you coming from with this sweeping
>statement that Photo Shop is like this wonder panacea?>>>>>>>>>>>

Well I guess I better give you something on this one, as I said I over
stated it a bit on the Photo Shop thing. However, I've watched guys do
things with an Adobe set-up that would make your head spin, so after
watching the magic that can be done with computers and whiz bang operator,
I feel I can make a generalization that stands not to far away from what I
originally said.

>To your next statement, about B&W being harder, I certainly, either from a
>PJ standpoint or a creative one have always found B&W easier and more
>pleasing and more flexible to work with. Contrast for one thing can be
>better exploited. This may be my personal opinion, but half my old peers
>are all crooning about the good old days.>>>>>>>

Well I have already made my point about B&W having only two elements to
work with and if you understand light and content it creates beautiful
images. But you had better recognize light first and make it work for you
or the photograph is just going to lie there flat on its ass without any
life!

And thats why I say in B&W you have only two elements to work with....the
light and the content. And there are no pretty colours to make it look
great, if one or the other of the two elements is off.  And that's why its
more difficult to make B&W really work....no colour to cover your ass!

<<<<<<<Your experience may be different, and your tastes, but it might be
better to confine your statements to personal experience and preference. It
seems in your postings that you are stating some ultimate truth.>>>>>>>>>

Well son I am!!!!!!!!! :) You're unfortunately the one having a bind, not me. :)

>PS I shot a portrait a few years ago, mom, dad, and kid. I had then luxury
>to do it with strobe, and then arrange it by the window for natural light.
>I naturally preferred the natural one. Hey, I had the time to be creative.
>Natural lights great if you have the time and luxury to use it.>>>>>>>>

Well now I'll give you that one on the time thing. But when you understand
" how to make existing light work for you" then you can shoot quickly,
accurately and with very fine results. The secret of good results is
recognizing what light there is as soon as you walk into a room or
situation, react to it by knowing where to move to make it work or moving
your subject into where the light is. And you can do this with colour or
B&W and I'm not the only guy who can work like this.

Sure it takes experience and time to learn how to make it work, but it
isn't that difficult if you know your equipment and the light in the area
where you are shooting.

<<<<<<Nevertheless, the editor, like most editors in the newsroom, chose
what he was used to. Strobe.>>>>>>

Well we who have to deal with visually challenged editors (most of them)
understand exactly what you mean. :)

<<<<<How simple you make it sound, how marveloysly aesthetic to go in to an
assigment, 'feel' the light. Yeah right. In a place where you have to
balance FLOURESCENT, TUNGSTEN, and a TOUCH OF DAYLIGHT. Yes, just feel the
light, the art of it all. No, mon ami, you go in with BLITZ and you use
your technigue there instead>>>>>>>>>

Gee whiz if you haven't covered any Olympics or other similar international
sports event you are in for a rude awakening, as you can't "use flash"
during competition. Period!!! So you better figure out how to "use the
light that's in your face"  And yes you better understand light and get the
best photo position to make that light work for you.

<<<<<Who said that using strobe is crude or unartful, even in the fast lane
of press photography?>>>>>>>>

Gee I don't know.  Who? :)

<<<<<<The true, true beauty of a Leitz lens is using natural light and
color. NO DENYING. But try telling your photochief that you needed to wait
for the right light, the right setting, when you've been sent in to
photograph in a mall.>>>

You see you are misunderstanding what I'm saying and what I do....I don't
have the luxury to wait around for the perfect light as you are suggesting,
I make what is there work for me, because I relate to light in a way to
make it work,

Let me put it this way....Your strobe crashes on you completely, no flash
el zippo. Now what do you do? And remember, you still have to go back and
face your "photo chief."  Do you figure out quickly the the best angle for
the light to make a good picture or do you throw up your hands and go back
with nothing?

<<<It's nice you have this luxury for painting with light. Most photographers
in the workaday world just don't. So, again, if we are going to joust here
we all need to define the mediums.....>>>>>>>>

Well no, you see I just sit around all day waiting for the sun to do it's
twinkie thing and then I rush out and make magnificent images! If it's work
you want, how would you like to do some 14 - 16 hour days with me on a
shoot? As far as painting with light? Hell that's where someone runs around
popping strobes all over the place....is that what you mean?  Not me baby,
I'm a "real light" photographer. :) :)

<<<<<You shoot chromes for a hospital? Ever handled the horrors of flourescent
either with strobe or CC filter? Maybe I should shut the lights off, open
the windows in the middle of an operation, tell the doctors to stop their
work, and move so I can get just that proper shaft of God's light while the
patient dies.>>>>>>>>>

Nope no chromes....B&W only, unless the surgeon asks me to stick my 100
macro into some body cavity for a few happy snaps, then it's 'chrome.

<<<<Maybe I should shut the lights off, open the windows in the middle of
an operation, tell the doctors to stop their work, and move so I can get
just that proper shaft of God's light while the patient dies.>>>>>>>>>

Do I detect a touch of sarcasm here? You getting a little testy son? And as
far as saying a dumb thing like, "so I can get just that proper shaft of
God's light while the patient dies.>>>>>>>>> is bloody insulting!

When you've had the amount of time I've had in OR's, hospitals and produced
an award winning book on the medical profession, then maybe you can make
comments about patients dying while I or you wait for "God's light!".

End of conversation!



Ted Grant
This is Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler.
http://www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant