Re: [Leica] Re: Noctilux vs Those "Other" lenses

["Ted Grant" <tedgrant@home.com>]

Martin Howard wrote:
>>>>>In any case, I've recently started shooting with my left eye, although
I'm
> right eyed.  I noticed something interesting: the photographic process has
> become less verbal.  I think less about what I'm taking a picture of and
> feel more.  Of course, it could all be self-deluding psychobabble, but on
> some level, I figure if it works, it works.<<<<<<

Martin me young son,
Take two full glasses of Lagavullin single malt and you'll feel better. If
not, call me in the morning and I'll send over a couple of aspirin! ;-)
ted
Ted Grant Photography Limited
www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant



- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Howard" <howard.390@osu.edu>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Noctilux vs Those "Other" lenses


> Ted Grant jotted down the following:
>
> > I have to tell you, you might consider yourself lucky to have had 20/20
at
> > all, as I've road through life as a one eyed monster, left only and a
pain
> > in the ass for years using an M or any other Leica until the good Mr.
Tom
> > came up with his magical RapidWinder!  So 20/20 is a luxury I have never
had
> > the good fortune to have. And I very much envy you.

Martin Howard responded:
> I'm not sure that's necessarily an asset in photography.  I've noticed
> lately that a number of really good photographers have pretty crappy eyes.
> And I've also noticed that a number of them are left-eyed shooters.  My
own
> take on this is that you take stronger pictures if the compositional
> elements in them have to be larger for you to notice.  If you don't see
the
> teeeney little details until you've made an 8x10 print, then the (big)
> important compositional details are going to be the ones you pay attention
> to (by default) when you take the pictures.  Which results in stronger
> pictures.
>
> My own pictures with the squinty Leica II were consistently better than
> those with the large, clear M viewfinder.  It was harder to see, so when
you
> finally did see something good, there was less issue as to whether it was
> good or not.  (Which, of course, fails miserably to explain why I sold the
> II and am getting a second M.)
>
> Now, as for the left-eyed part: I don't know if there is any real truth to
> the issue of "left hemisphere vs. right hemisphere", but isn't the right
> hemisphere supposed to be the "artistic" one?  And doesn't the left eye
> connect to the right hemisphere?
>
> >
> M.
>
> --
> Martin Howard                     |
> Visiting Scholar, CSEL, OSU       | Quidquid latine dictum, altum videtur.
> email: howard.390@osu.edu         |
> www: http://mvhoward.i.am/        +---------------------------------------
>
>
>