Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/03/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]George this is a thoughtful and cogent response. Of course I was expressing my own freely offered opinions as well. One person's OOF quality is another's under-corrected aberration ;-) Actually I expected that the Europeans may voice an interest on this too. Perhaps later as posts percolate through in-boxes. Meanwhile I have one hundred and fifty new family images to sort and consider. A great many of course have little or no artistic value and mainly they are very sharp. Always when the operator did his part! It does bring to mind for me that such records have their own value too. Simply another application for the chosen tool. Again too, the experience and satisfaction of using that fine tool is part of its value. Kind regards Geoff -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Lottermoser George Sent: Sunday, 23 March 2008 01:30 To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Shoot with what you brung On Mar 21, 2008, at 5:21 PM, Geoff Hopkinson wrote: > I don't > subscribe to the viewpoint that a lens can be too sharp for a > particular > subject though. Nor do i. I love seeing every single pore and imperfection. That's the aesthetic that I've always worked in and strived for. Yet, I see work done by serious photographers whose sensibility and aesthetic works in harmony with soft focus; or Holga's blend of sharp centers and soft vignettes; and the images work because they speak in the language required. > But you have repeated the argument in essence that competence with > your > camera and photographic skill are the most important factors in > making a > worthy image. without doubt in my mind. > That being accepted, better equipment with the same skill set > and circumstance will make better photographs. Not necessarily. The mastery lies in choosing the correct tool to achieve the desired result. And that may very well be a pinhole in front of an 11x14 piece of film; or an SX-70; or a Holga; or whatever. > Else you might be satisfied > shooting only with a camera-phone or similar. 'tis not a matter of "satisfied" but a matter of knowing what the tool can do and whether you wish to use the tool marks. Sculpture, wood carving, clay and ceramic art may serve as the best analogy. Folks who appreciate those arts appreciate the artist's appropriate use of tool marks including the hand as a tool. > What are those appealing qualities for you in the LOMO or Holga > images; > lower contrast and saturation, soft focus effect? I genuinely feel, > that > Holga folks are really saying 'look at the picture I made despite > having the > most basic camera' No doubt many Holga user's have that goal in mind. Other's actually learn what the tool has to say and use it in ways that exploit its character (some would say flaws). We often speak of OOF quality of $2 - $3K lenses. Why would we then put down the OOF quality of $2.00 lens - if it also comes across as lovely? The bottom line; always; does the photograph have soul? does it move you? does display aesthetic qualities? or is just a tack sharp of record of a person, place or thing? > I'd rather say 'look at the picture I made as I try to > live up to the quality of my camera' Both valid certainly. > We can meet on the common ground of 'Jeez, look at that'...click always on common ground ;~) just expressing my thoughts and feelings on the subject of photography Fond regards, George george@imagist.com www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog Picture A Week - www.imagist.com/paw_07 _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information