Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/02[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
>Hi Martin and Guy: >I'd like to quibble a bit about this. It seems to me that to create an >outstanding image requires both an extraordinary eye for the visual >statement and the technical craft to pull it off. If I was blessed with >only one gift, I would choose having a good eye. But I had better know >enough craft to set appropriate exposure, focus, depth of field, shutter >speed, etc. to create the impact that I want in the final image. Otherwise, >my wonderful "eye" will appear blind to the ultimate viewer of the image. A >painter friend of mine once commented on a water color: "a very nice idea, >just wish he could draw". >Bob Stack bob, i completely agree with you - an eye *and* a brain are necessary to make good pictures. i was commenting on a kind of 'eyeless' photography (to describe it that way) that seems to favor technical perfection over visual composition. based on my own experience as a reader of books and magazines on photography, this type of photography seems to be most frequently produced by what i would describe as 'hard-core' zone system photographers. don't misunderstand me: i am not against the zone system - i think it can be very useful, and - though i'm not ready to test all aspects of my 'system' for best z-s performance - i do use a sort of simplified version of the z-s to help determine exposure. and i'm certainly not against knowing the craft of photography (otherwise, i wouldn't be using an m), i just feel that the search for the technically perfect neg/print should be accompanied by the search for an equally compelling content/composition. guy n.b. and on the issue of leica dogma: if you wish to set your m on a tripod, shoot landscapes (or whatever) at small apertures for long exposure times, more power to you. i personally can't see doing that kind of photography with a rangefinder, but i'm not trying to tell anybody what they should or shouldn't use.