Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/01/21

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

Subject: [Leica] Eye vs. Camera Lens
From: leica at web-options.com (Bob W)
Date: Wed Jan 21 14:58:11 2009
References: <AB0CFA2879204DF6937E80CB0030A682@precisionm50> <C59C35E9.48BDC%mark@rabinergroup.com>

It was a reaction against the imitation of painting. The mainstream of
photography at the time was epitomised by the work of photographers such as
H P Robinson and Oscar Reijlander who constructed photographs using cut &
paste to make up scenes that met the requirements of academic studio-based
painting. Emerson and others took their cameras outdoors and photographed
life as it was lived.

If their work sometimes now reminds us now of Impressionist painting,
remember that at the time Impressionist painting was avant garde and was
itself a reaction to photography and its excessive realism. His work
resembles that of Millet in many ways, and similarly requires some
explanation nowadays because we don't always recognise aspects of rural life
that were commonplace at the time.

I thoroughly recommend the book The Older Order And The New: P H Emerson and
Photography.
http://www.nationalmediamuseum.org.uk/emerson/

More about Emerson and Robinson:
http://www.nationalmediamuseum.org.uk/emerson/in_or_out_focus.asp

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+leica=web-options.com@leica-users.org 
> [mailto:lug-bounces+leica=web-options.com@leica-users.org] On 
> Behalf Of Mark Rabiner
> Sent: 21 January 2009 07:16
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Eye vs. Camera Lens
> 
> I thought it was because with such soft effects it imitated "art".
> As in painting.
> And or watercolor.
> 
> A mere photograph with no pretensions got no respect those days.
> 
> 
> Mark William Rabiner
> 
> 
> 
> > From: Bob W <leica@web-options.com>
> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
> > Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 02:52:07 -0000
> > To: 'Leica Users Group' <lug@leica-users.org>
> > Subject: RE: [Leica] Eye vs Camera Lens
> > 
> >> 
> >> LUG:
> >> 
> >> B&H has an interesting article:
> >> 
> >> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/newsLetter/The-Photographic-Eye.jsp
> >> 
> >> Includes bokeh information!
> >> 
> >> Tina
> >> 
> >> Tina Manley
> >> www.tinamanley.com
> >> 
> > 
> > This observation about blurriness, from Herman von 
> Helmholtz's ideas about
> > human vision, is one of the ideas that P H Emerson brought 
> to photography
> > when he formalised Pictorialism. While we often think of 
> pictorialism as
> > unrealistic it is in some ways more realistic than its f/64 
> secessionist
> > successors. Emerson's aim was to produce photographs that 
> mimicked our
> > vision, and that is why he promoted the use of soft focus 
> and shallow depth
> > of field. 
> > 
> > Bob
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 
> 


Replies: Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Eye vs. Camera Lens)
In reply to: Message from leica at web-options.com (Bob W) ([Leica] Eye vs Camera Lens)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Eye vs. Camera Lens)