Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/05/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric Welch wrote: > > There are times when it does serve a purpose. But I think you are right. > Digital is only going to lower the quality of photojournalism for the near > future. It limits what one can do without lights, which means more static > moments that are "perfectly lit" but perfectly dull portraits. We have > enough portraits already! How can one photograph kids in class with lights > bouncing off the ceiling? You can't. But it sure looks good, technically. Eric, Even your buddy Jim Stansfield uses lights. Little ones maybe, but lights. He is a master of the assisted ambient. Check photo in Khan story of family in the yurt. Indeed, with the Metz cordless ttl and an R8 or new M6 and the proper setting, things can look very natural, and if you shoot enough, even the kids loose interest. Just scatter 2 or 3 40Mzs around the edges to kick a litle character into the ambient and there you go. Tape on a bit of plus green to match the Florescents, plus a 1/4 cto warming and Geographic here you come. I once lit a dance floor with four vivitar 283s with slaves, X lighting, shooting down the balcony and it was perfect on Kodachrome 64. F/2 and be there for a quarter second. donal - -- Donal Philby San Diego http://www.donalphilby.com