[Leica] Re: Leica Users digest V18 #84

[Mike Johnston <michaeljohnston@ameritech.net>]

> Welcome back to you both...
> 
> Duane Birkey


Thanks, Duane. I finished my book (well, _a_ book), quit my job, moved,
bought a new house, and the new darkroom is now on its second night of
construction--i.e., just barely begun, but the plans are in an advanced
state. I should have the framing finished by the end of the month, then I do
the ceiling, and so on.

My next book is now well underway, and is turning out to have rather a lot
of Leica content.


Byron R.>>>
>>>There's nothing wrong with putting an M6 on a tripod.<<<

Of course there isn't. Did someone say there was? Not me. I just said it
wasn't a necessary requirement of good photography.


Rob A.>>>
>>>Using a tripod is simply a matter of personal choice that says absolutely
nothing about the kind of picture that's going to come out.

And I think that's not so. Okay, so you and I disagree. That's okay too.

>>>Just look at Bruce Davidson's East 100th Street (or whatever) - all done with
large format - not handheld!<<<

Okay, so we _really_ disagree! <s> I think "East 100th Street" is among
Davidson's weakest work and a perfect example of the kind of static, so-what
stuff I'm saying tripods tend to encourage--see his recent book of portraits
for somewhat similar, but much better, work. Anyway, "East 100th Street" is
not 35mm, so isn't that what I was saying?

Mike's LUG-induced personal position paper on tripods:
1. Do whatever you please. It's a free country.
2. It is perfectly possible to get a good picture--even a nice, sharp
picture--without a tripod.
3. M Leicas are like pistols, made for handheld shooting. It might be a wise
idea not to fight the concept too hard (but see 1., above).
4. If you _are_ planning to use a tripod, you might as well use a bigger
camera (but see 1., above).

Also, I very much doubt that Cartier-Bresson took more than one frame of
that man jumping over the puddle. It's one of his weakest pictures
technically, one of the few in his oevre that is always cropped (the
"blackline" on that picture is actually faked in printing); furthermore,
I've seen his negative books at Magnum New York and he typically did not
"work" a subject by shooting multiple frames of it. I don't know how in the
world you could say that _that_ picture could have been taken with a tripod.
I'd say that that is _highly_ unlikely. Unless you presume the fat man was a
friend of his and kept obligingly turning back around for yet another try at
leaping the puddle (are you claiming that picture was _staged_?!?). Again,
we may simply disagree, and I have no problem with that.

Jeff S. 
>>>Using this vintage camera body with a
multicoated aspherical lens such as the Heliar is a delicious bit of
irony. For now, I plan on using it alongside my M-cameras as sort of a
dedicated superwide setup<<<

Now _that_ is a good idea.

- --Mike