Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/02/04

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Film "died" for me this week
From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:44:25 -0500
References: <BC461610.6404%mark@rabinergroup.com>

On Feb 4, 2004, at 6:22 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:

Why "NO ARCHIVE" at the end of this -- its a classic -- this is one of 
the few posts that *should* be archived :-))

> On 2/1/04 9:32 AM, "rclompus@cox.net" <rclompus@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I had the opportunity to try out and view some 8 1/2 X 11 color prints
>> from the Canon Rebel with the $100 18-55mm lens.  The whole deal
>> costs $999.  I was blown away with the quality and depth of the photos
>> from such a cheap outfit.
>>
>> I have been in love with Leica M and R since the late 1980's when I 
>> could
>> finally afford to buy the bodies and lenses I needed for my personal
>> photos.  I have multiple bodies and over two dozen lenses.  It all
>> changed today.  I'll keep a few for my artsy work but the rest will
>> probably go.  I know the cheap Canon body and lenses will be worth
>> nothing in a few years but I'll be taking more photos and enjoying
>> photography more.  I never bought equipment for investment purposes.
>>
>> I wish Leica had an alternative but that was not meant to be for me.  
>> I
>> donated my extensive Zone VI darkroom to my daughter's high school
>> this year.  Silver halide is wonderful but it "died" for me this 
>> week.  It's
>> all
>> in the mind but what a tidewater change for me.  My next investment 
>> will
>> be in the new Epson 4000 printer to supplement my P2200.
>>
>> Richard Clompus
>> Roanoke, VA
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe, see 
>> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
> This of course is a real pain in the ass thing to say on the Leica 
> Users
> List but when this kind of post happens I wonder and my question often 
> has
> been this in effect:
> How much died?
> Was he a great person with a great future? A great loss?
> How tragic of a thing are we really talking about here?
> Perhaps this person was slight and is finally being put to of a long 
> drawn
> out misery.
> We should cry a whole lot less maybe.
>
> Are we having a big funeral for what lets face it had been a fairly 
> small
> commitment in the first place? I hope not!
>
> Had they been in their darkroom cranking out 16x20's every weekend and 
> now
> they're ratcheting out even more exquisite reams of A3's instead as 
> they
> answer their email?
>
> Had they been shooting a brick of Kodachrome every week but now 
> wearing a
> necklace of compact flash cards around their neck like dog tags?
>
> When you see a post like this it strongly implies the PROCESS let them 
> down.
> Has been proved mediocre.
> The new one is taking over as it reigns supreme.
>
> This implies strongly the strength in the new technology and the 
> weakness in
> the old.
> But when I ask if I get an answer it's amazingly often a sheepish "No 
> they'd
> not really been using their cameras that much anyway for quite some 
> time.
> The darkroom had been sitting mainly dormant.
> They have no real body of work
> No stack of prints to show friends when they come over.
> No "book" as in prints stuck in pages.
> No tray (round of 80 slides to stick on a projector). Or Pages of 
> slides or
> in boards.
> No website.
> Nothing uploaded much of anywhere.
> Not much of nothin.
> They are 4x6" once every month or so minilab for the most part people.
>
> So I wonder; How much Tri X had he been shooting?.
> ...Before giving it up for charge coupled devices.
> Did they have so much Dektol in your blood that now they're going to 
> go cold
> turkey? !!
>
> I'm just guessing no -
> It's a new hobby to replace one that wasn’t really there.
>
> Two dozen lenses? That's a sure clue.
>
> Of the two dozen pro's I know personally locally and globally none of 
> them
> come close to using or owning Two dozen Leica lenses for their 
> shooting that
> I can think of.
> Is this the death of a Leica shooter?
> Because it just sounds like a funeral for a Leica collector or Leica 
> buyer
> and seller. A Leica dabbler.
>
> 24 lenses!
> That's 3 times 8!
> 4 times 6!
> Enough glass for 3 4 5 6 committed Leica shooters!
>
> How anyone can look me straight in the face and put out the phrase 
> "Canon
> Rebel with the $100 18-55mm lens." as a balance of some kind against a 
> more
> than abundant setup of Leica gear is beyond me!!! What could be the
> correlation between one of those cheap plastic zoom lenses and any 
> Leica
> glass ever made including wale blubber incrusted?
> ...A "Rebel" against an M or R? How do they in any way relate?
> Opposites perhaps?
> That's pretty simple actually!
>
> But as I said earlier when someone says they're going digital now I 
> say:
> "Really how lovely!!!"
> "Lets look at your prints!!!!!!"
> I love to see how the two technologies compare.
>
> I LOVE to see how the new A3's (11.7x16.5") and letter sized prints 
> stack up
> against the old thick 11x14's and 8x10's.
> They stick out on all sides by about 3/4s of an inch and get all 
> crinkled at
> the edges that's how!
> I think plenty of people who struggled in the darkroom do fine at their
> computer. Maybe printing now for the first time.
> But also very much visa versa.
> They are just tools put into the hands of the unskilled and 
> uncommitted to
> produce very casual results. Hopefully to be traded for something else
> sooner than later. And without making a Federal case out of it.
>
> Mark Rabiner
>
>
>
>
> Mark Rabiner
> Photography
> Portland, Oregon
> http://rabinergroup.com/Catagorypages/PersonalWork.html
>
> NO ARCHIVE
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html