Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/11/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: LUG Digest, Vol 30, Issue 555
From: philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent)
Date: Sat Nov 19 12:56:11 2005
References: <r02010500-1043-5420FDC2593B11DAB05B0011246F5C92@[66.239.170.64]>

I love your answer, George, and if I were able to describe my  
(amateur) feelings vs. film, they would be very similar: a part of  
the magic is gone. And I also agree lots of other good things are  
replacing it.
But about not being able to work with the best material thus digital  
medium format backs: why don't you rent one when you need it? Over  
here it's become an accepted part of the client's budget, replacing  
the former development costs etc.



Op 19-nov-05, om 21:30 heeft George Lottermoser het volgende geschreven:

>> From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@comcast.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] PAW week 16
>
>> And people think they need to shoot film....why? :-)
>
> For the look and pleasure that film cameras offer ;-) also for "fine
> detail" on slow emulsions.
>
> I find myself relying on the 20d, carrying it always, finally arriving
> at a work-flow-groove with digital imaging software. But I truly miss
> using the M's (I fear that I won't be able to afford the digital
> version), blads, and view cameras. There's definitely something  
> missing.
> As I mentioned to someone off-list last week; re: view camera work -
> after spending many moments to hours under a dark cloth to get
> everything right - that moment when you close the shutter, stop  
> down to
> that perfect f:stop and slide the film holder into the back and  
> grab the
> cable release - m-m-m-m-good. Especially when the film holder holds  
> 8x10
> inches of film (the perfect negative IMHO, 11x14 and 12x20 was fun but
> just too damn big). Then you get another rush, when in the darkroom  
> you
> achieve perfect the development of that single negative. And another
> when that print begins to appear in the tray.
>
> I love the look of a fine inkjet print. But I don't have the same
> feeling when the thing comes out of the printer that I do when that
> illusive image appears in a tray.
>
> There's also a magic when photographing in the studio, or on location
> and the subject and/or client doesn't know what you've got "in the  
> can."
> They just trust you; and only you know the magic you've succeeded or
> failed to capture.
>
> Likewise when doing documentary work - the tension I felt with 5 rolls
> of film in my pocket has disappeared.
>
> I'm not making a case for film. Simply, expressing the thoughts and
> feelings which float about as my work flow changes. I could also  
> express
> positive ideas and opinions about the digital work flow. The  
> sentimental
> difference probably rests in the fact that I spent literally 45  
> serious,
> professional years with film in darkrooms, and only a few in this
> digital capture/print realm.
>
> There's also something weird about not being able to afford to work
> daily with best digital (medium format backs and scanning backs) after
> cutting my teeth on 8x10 and hassy chromes from my teens on. For  
> all of
> our digital toying around - looking at 5x7 jpg's on screen - anyone
> who's serious about digital photography owes themselves a look at a
> state-of-the-art digital file on a large, well calibrated monitor -  
> and
> a lightjet print from same. Yes, film quality is possible but we're  
> not
> getting it with our toys. Close. Maybe even close enough. But :-)
>
> regards, George
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from imagist at imagist.cnc.net (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Re: LUG Digest, Vol 30, Issue 555)