Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/06/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tell us what the connotations ARE please if you have the time!!!?!? To A la sauvette. Which google says translates to "on the fly". As we don't know many French people who are in a position to really tell us. And inquiring LugNuts want to know - - from my iRabs. Mark Rabiner http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ > From: Philippe Amard <philippe.amard at sfr.fr> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 21:22:14 +0200 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Are we anal puddle jumpers or what? Mark > > Sorry Mark, on the fly is different - would translate as "? la vol?e", > "en passant" or "au passage, or "ce faisant", "dans le m?me temps", > "en mouvement", etc > A la sauvette is really different - the connotations are lost in > translation, another film I enjoyed a lot BTW > > ph > > > Le 19 juin 12 ? 20:55, Mark Rabiner a ?crit : > >> "A la sauvette" translates directly to "On the fly". >> A guy I read said idiomatically for us it meant doing snap shots. >> Working >> fast. >> >> Which to me suggested the direct opposite of "decisive moment". >> Which sounds very precious. and concisely planned. >> >> - - from my iRabs. >> Mark Rabiner >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ >> >> >>> From: Philippe Amard <philippe.amard at sfr.fr> >>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >>> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:45:34 +0200 >>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Are we anal puddle jumpers or what? >>> >>> Just for your information the original title in French is NOT the >>> decisive moment, >>> it is "A la sauvette" >>> which probably doesn't translate well >>> but conveys the idea that permission was not granted, >>> and that the action was probably swift so that surrounding people >>> wouldn't notice it; >>> cf. end of video #2 of HCB hopping along on the streets of Paris and >>> shooting by instinct, >>> sometimes nearly bumping into passers-by to get the shot. >>> REM: He'd get a new set of teeth everyday if he were to try this >>> nowadays ... >>> >>> VDO >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqsOYsZlPX4 >>> Photography for him is a "way/means for drawing" or "to keep a >>> diary". >>> He says he would have much fun shooting without film in the camera >>> were it not for the urgency to communicate and bring testimonies of >>> the world as it is. >>> >>> "We steal, we're picpockets" ... >>> >>> Insists a lot on his background as a painter, and some of his masters >>> >>> @4'50 "I have a passion for geometry" (look at his hand movements >>> then) >>> >>> MORE HERE >>> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjjGiBUaf4s&feature=relmfu >>> >>> some references to gear - asked he says there's no recipe, he sets >>> the >>> shudder speed at 1/125 and knows about the rest by instinct - the >>> Leica is just there because of its format (last seconds) prefered >>> over >>> the square ... his pet lens is a 50mm, the other two are used only on >>> assignments. >>> >>> Some form of contradiction though : in the first document he states >>> that the photog should be neutral, or at least be immersed into the >>> other's culture (referring to China then) whereas in the second he >>> states that the photog's - read his - point of view can conflict with >>> that of the magazine's editors (in the lay-out for instance) ... >>> >>> Hope this didn't bother anyone. >>> Bien cordialement de Metz, Lorraine >>> Philippe, back to flowers due to the shortage of poodles today. >>> >>> >>> Le 19 juin 12 ? 17:23, B. D. Colen a ?crit : >>> >>>> I've been reading this thread and have a couple thoughts: >>>> 1. Equipment: Of course equipment is important, it was important to >>>> HCB, >>>> it's important to all of us today. It is not, however, the be all >>>> and end >>>> all many endless discussions of micro contrast, glass, and pixels >>>> would lead >>>> one to believe. Someone yesterday or today made the comment that >>>> today's >>>> photographers keep upgrading their equipment, and need to, if they >>>> are >>>> serious about their craft. Well, yes, but what isn't mentioned is >>>> that >>>> today's camera body is not simply the light-tight box bodies were 20 >>>> years >>>> ago, but it is the box AND the film. That is, today a photographer >>>> is >>>> required to upgrade equipment with some frequency because digital >>>> sensors >>>> are still evolving, just as film evolved over a period of many >>>> decades. So >>>> in order to be able to meet client and publishing standards, a >>>> photographer >>>> is required to upgrade. But the photographer who bought a pair of >>>> M3s in the >>>> 1950s, did NOT have to upgrade his bodies ? EVER ? if he didn't beat >>>> them to >>>> death. The photographer did, however, upgrade her film. But the >>>> Nikon or >>>> Canon glass from 20 years ago is plenty good to shoot with it today. >>>> So, for >>>> that matter, are Leica's first generation aspheric lenses plenty >>>> good today. >>>> If someone wants the latest $7k Summicron, good for them. But there >>>> is no >>>> NEED to make that upgrade. >>>> 2. Analism: Anal is as anal does. HCB was not the film era >>>> equivalent of a >>>> pixel peeper. He did not wear a loupe around his neck for counting >>>> eyelashes. He was an artist who cared most about composition, and >>>> the ways >>>> in which visual elements came together and played off each other. >>>> Counting >>>> facial hairs is not photography, and really has little to do with >>>> photography. Does a particular lens effectively suppress veiling >>>> flare when >>>> shooting with strong backlighting? That is important to a >>>> photographer, >>>> because it effects her ability to successful capture a given image. >>>> But >>>> being able to examine a pimple on the face of the man in the moon in >>>> a night >>>> shot of lower Manhattan? Not so much. >>>> 3. HCB and how many times he pushed the shutter release: Yes, HCB >>>> shot >>>> thousands of frames we have and will never seen. But don't kid >>>> yourselves >>>> that this somehow means that he, or similar 'giants' weren't as good >>>> as >>>> we've been lead to believe. The question is not, did he shoot >>>> thousands of >>>> frames he discarded? Rather, it is how good are his keepers, how to >>>> they >>>> compare to everyone else's keepers, and how many of them are there? >>>> We all, >>>> in our life times of shooting, may come up with one or two HCB-like >>>> images. >>>> What we will never come up with are the hundreds he produced. >>>> 4. Was the Puddle Jumper posed, and does it matter: As I said >>>> before, and I >>>> gather various people's searches have indicated I am correct, that >>>> image was >>>> an unposed one-off. But some people have suggested over the last >>>> couple of >>>> days that it's the outcome that matters, 'art is art,' and we >>>> shouldn't care >>>> if it was posed. I vehemently disagree. Because if that, or other >>>> supposedly >>>> unposed images were posed, it tells us that HCB was a completely >>>> different >>>> kind of artist from what we thought he was. Philippe Halsman, a >>>> wonderful >>>> Magnum Photographer, made jumping his gimmick. He produced terrific >>>> images >>>> of everyone from Richard Nixon to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor >>>> jumping on >>>> command. But Philippe Halsman was not HCB. He was not a chronicler >>>> of the >>>> "decisive moment." He is not noted for creating incredibly composed >>>> images >>>> of moments in real life and real time; HCB is. If it turns out that >>>> HCB >>>> posed images ? and I am NOT suggesting, nor do I believe, that he >>>> posed >>>> anything other than some portraits, then he simply was not the >>>> photographer >>>> we thought he was and his work needs to be reconsidered. (When Bruce >>>> Davidson's Outside Inside came out, I went to hear him speak at >>>> Boston >>>> University. During a rambling discourse he said that he ALWAYS asked >>>> permission before photographing his subjects. IF that is true, I >>>> think his >>>> work needs to be reconsidered. He still is a brilliant photographer, >>>> but IF >>>> that's true, he is more a brilliant fashion-type photographer, than >>>> the >>>> documentarian he has been thought to be. (I must note here that I >>>> have heard >>>> from a number of sources I trust, and concluded myself from listen >>>> to him, >>>> that age has really caught up with Davidson's mental faculties, and >>>> I would >>>> NOT take his saying he always asked permission as reliable >>>> testimony.) >>>> 5. The Decisive Moment: For all the talk about the Decisive Moment, >>>> and the >>>> idea many have that HCB saw these special moments flash before his >>>> eye and >>>> grabbed them, I would contend that the true decisive moment is that >>>> instant >>>> in which he ? or anyone ? saw or sees the photographic possibilities >>>> in a >>>> scene, a situation, and THEN begins to work that scene, until all >>>> the >>>> compositional elements come together. With the anal puddle jumper, >>>> the >>>> decisive moment would have been that instant when HCB saw the hole >>>> in the >>>> fence, realized what was going on, and started shooting. All of >>>> which to say >>>> that the fulfillment of genius requires hard work. >>>> Back to anal puddle jumping. :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information