Re: [Leica] tools

[Lucian Chis <chis@ece.orst.edu>]

It may sound strange to some, but you don't need a Leica for the ART of
photography; buy yourself a Holga and a roll of tape (duct or
otherwise)(Sorry Diana users; you are already paying too much).
However, photography is not an art form exclusively; it overextends to
other areas (journalism, technology, you name it!) and underextends in art.
There are tons of professional photograpers who never had a single
artistic shot! And they are GREAT photographers.
Photography is interesting in that it leaves less room for personal
interpretation and "color" than any art form. Painting is the foremost
example of this, but music can express a lot of its composer, interpreter,
conductor, more or less than the initial "thing" that triggered it.
I had a lot of deceptions for example any time I saw a movie adaptation of
a novel I had previously read, when I used to see movies. There is a lot
of the director scenario writer in any movie.
Take a shot at journalism in books; say you were the witness of something
and then you read about it in a book: ever had the feeling of inadequacy?
Without pictures it seems made up.
I this respect photography is a lot more objective. And that's why
photography itself is served better by "good tools".
A good tool not only makes your job easier, it can inspire you and it
makes it all POSSIBLE. 
(A small parenthesis here: It is amazing how ignorant people can be: I
witnessed a presentation on an LCD projected screen and then talked to
someone of the organizers about the lack of resolution of the reproducion
media. 
The guy said that he remebers one of those slide projectors from his
youth; he wasn't aware they still made such beasts!)
Some lenses don't have enough resolution for anything worthwile. I can't
use long lenses on R Leica for moving subjects, as my focusing is too
slow; I can shoot a picture which will be better than anything I shot with
Leica with Nikon AF or CAnon AF, in spite of arguably lower quality glass.
(I think once you get up there, the quality isn't that much different, but
then the prices aren't either).
I don't want a discussion of focusing techniques now!
For static shots Leica does better. and then at the short end you can't
beat rangefinders, because of their freedom from design constraints.

So there you have it: ART with any camera; photography?  with the best!

Lucian

On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Mikiro Mori wrote:

> Hi, all.  When I used to do some oil painting, fellow art-lovers talked
> endlessly about paints, brushes, canvas, etc...  Of course there was a tacit
> agreement that tools are not a priority in artistic expression, but they
> loved talking about them.  So do we (?) ;-)
> 
> 
> Mikiro
> Strasbourg
> 
> -----
> At 6:17 pm +0200 30/7/99, Dan Post wrote:
> >I would like to ask the writers among you, does anyone ever come up to you
> >and say, "Gee, I like your work... what kind of typewriter / word processor
> >/ computer do you use?"
> >I have never heard an interview with a writer where this question is asked.
> >Why then do so many of us seem so hung up on what we're using rather than
> >why and what we are using it for?
> >I tired to find a carpenter's forum to see if there was a discussion or
> >thread about the relative merits of Craftsman or Stanley hammers... no luck!
> >Dan :o}~
> >
> >> Also a hammer is a tool a Leica is a camera (or a lens  or).  You wouldn't
> >> use a hammer to take pictures (unless you wanted to be inconspicuous).  I
> >> never have asked another photographer hey, what kind of tool is that?
> >He's
> >> be thinking tool...and then you would wish you had a hammer.
> >>
> >>
> 
> 
> 
>