Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/14

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Erwin's Latest
From: scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin)
Date: Tue Jun 14 09:53:21 2005
References: <6929073.1118767074506.JavaMail.root@wamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Reflecting on your comments, I think there are certain types
of photographs or compositions or "ideas" where technique and
gear and processing matter more than others. Just an example,
but the LF landscape shooting crowd certainly go to extreme lengths
to turn some rolling hills or fields of wheat into remarkable visual
experiences.  Same perhaps for that style of color work where
via lens sharpness and exposure (I imagine, dunno much about
color really) the subjects just seems to leap off the paper in a 3d'ish
kind of way.

Then there's that gritty high contrast, Rodinal, blurry kind of urban
street shooting that can be just lovely and engaging - and just as
well shot with one of those disposable Kodak B&W cameras.

Scott

Douglas Herr wrote:

>Mark Langer <langeratcarleton@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>One hardly needs to state the obvious -- it isn't the
>>equipment that makes photography.  It is the photographer.  It is safe
>>to say that a great photographer will make more arresting images with
>>a disposable camera than an idiot can with the most advanced Leica or
>>digital equipment available.
>>    
>>
>
>Yet it keeps being repeated.  IMHO this is an over-simplificiation of what 
>makes a good photograph.  An idea, an eye for composition, an understanding 
>of lighting, technique, capture medium and processing, and the equipment's 
>capabilities all play a part.  IMHO the concept is of primary importance 
>but it will be weakened by poor execution.  Likewise poor lighting weakens 
>the impact of the photo, inadequate technique and indifferent processing 
>can also diminish a photo's impact, and poorly-performing equipment takes 
>another bit out the picture.
>
>We don't all have the concepts or the eye of the masters but we can improve 
>our pictures - or at least reduce the second- or third-order weaknesses - 
>by paying attention to the other factors that make up a good photograph.  
>If the equipment truly doesn't matter we might as well be using a Yashica 
>or Ricoh and have more money in our pockets for other toys.  If the quality 
>of the equipment does make a difference, even if it's a third-order factor, 
>then a photo with a good concept, good lighting, good composition and good 
>technique made with a good camera will be stronger than the same photo made 
>with a plastic disposable.  We're looking at one variable here, the 
>equipment, and assuming the others are held constant.
>
>
>Doug Herr
>Birdman of Sacramento
>http://www.wildlightphoto.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>  
>



Replies: Reply from langeratcarleton at gmail.com (Mark Langer) ([Leica] Re: Erwin's Latest)
In reply to: Message from telyt at earthlink.net (Douglas Herr) ([Leica] Re: Erwin's Latest)