RE: [Leica] Recipe for leica glow?

["Dan Honemann" <danh@selectsa.com>]

Erwin (and others),

I've noticed a quality in the HCB (and other) prints I've seen that
distinguish them from other (often more contemporary) work.  I'm willing to
entertain _any_ reasons for this difference--but I'm not willing to discount
my own (admittedly  subjective) perception of this difference.

Some possible explanations for the difference include (and these are not
mutually exclusive):

1. The photographer's talent--both in terms of the technique employed
(exposure, angle, composition, etc.) and eye for subject matter.

2. The subject matter: the period, the people, the environment captured in
the photos.

3. The printer's talent and techniques.

4. The equipment used--for capturing the image on film (the lens and the
emulsion), for processing the film, and for printing it (and here there are
many, many factors).

Assuming that this difference is perceptible, and that it is preferred,
doesn't it make sense to seek ways to reach that same quality in one's own
work?  I'm not suggesting it is entirely the equipment; it might be all
about technique.  It might even be exclusively the domain of artistic talent
or vision (in which case, what is one to do but to listen to more Bach :)).

I'd like to experiment to see what I can do, if anything, to at least move
in the direction of the quality of prints that HCB (and/or his printers) was
able to achieve.  I have no expectation of achieving the same quality as
HCB, but I believe it to be a worthy challenge.

Part of that challenge lies in identifying, as best as one can, what the
differentiating factors might be between these high quality prints and those
that have less impact.

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Erwin Puts
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 4:17 PM
> To: L U G
> Subject: [Leica] Recipe for leica glow?
>
>
> There is no Leica glow. So every receipt is right. Mr Johnstons advice to
> use a low contrast about standard focal length lens, with a classic silver
> rich film, overexpose by a stop, develop short, use a diffusion
> enlarger and
> use FB paper and print with low contrast  is a remarkable
> nonsensical piece
> of
> photographic technique. It will give you results that are as flat as some
> scientists in the past thought about the radius of the earth. If
> this is the
> essence of what a century of photographic research has come up, I welcome
> the age of digital photography. That will be refreshing in the extreme.
>
> Erwin
>