Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/03/12

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

Subject: [Leica] Not Buying M8
From: chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich)
Date: Wed Mar 12 12:30:12 2008
References: <1205299901.47d76abdf119f@panthermail.uwm.edu> <C3FD3B96.94B6D%mark@rabinergroup.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20080312112933.01535008@pop.med.cornell.edu> <5CC4239D-434A-4C36-A7E9-02C488D24A2F@cox.net>

Your work is a good example.  Brings to mind the crying baby photographs, 
where the photographer made the babies cry on purpose.  The crying baby 
makes for a visceral reaction as does you images, (having worked in a 
cancer hospital with pediatric cases I can relate to your images on this 
level), but in the former case one might ask, why are the babies crying? 
and the answer is because it is what the photographer wanted.  In your 
images one might ask why is the child in the hospital?  Not because of the 
photographer!  The important part is that we know this information  When 
(What) we don't know I feel it is a problem that is understated and little 
understood.  In the digital world it seems we tend to know less and less, 
subjective reality is off the map, which is what makes me nervous because 
is seems easy and popular; anyone can do it.  As an exploration for artists 
it is a rich area which makes me wish I was 25 and in art school.  As a 
middle aged person on the verge of xenophobia, drinking too much caffeine, 
it is troublesome.

At 12:35 PM 3/12/2008, you wrote:

>On Mar 12, 2008, at 9:06 AM, Chris Saganich wrote:
>
>>Well again, vision doesn't cease with the shutter.  The extension of
>>vision into the darkroom or the computer is often necessary.  Those
>>who are solidly grounded in the conceptual framework of extension of
>>vision photography or the painterly concepts of photography have
>>little trouble with the digital world.  Like solarization or IR film
>>these are obvious painterly concepts, removing reality from images,
>>bringing attention to the handwork rather then the subject.  Except
>>in the digital world this commingling of concepts becomes so subtle
>>that reality can be purged or invented without anyone seeing it.  It
>>is like there is violence being committed but no one notices or
>>cares, the violence is invisible, and this is why the digital world
>>seems sinister to me.
>
>I think this was always true...though it's made easier now...not
>altogether new or different...
>
>In my experience, my own photography for my book, comprising almost
>all film images, I found the honest documentation of children in the
>hospital a conscious, ongoing struggle every step of the way.
>
>Accurate and honest depiction of the child's reality was the goal, but
>necessarily included getting people to look...
>
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>
>"I never wanted to be famous"
>
>www.blurb.com
>
>
>
>
>>  Perhaps in academics there is a language for this but I haven't
>>come across it.  There is a new animal in the forest and I'm trying
>>to understand what it eats.
>>
>>At 07:49 AM 3/12/2008, you wrote:
>>>A great many of the worlds greatest photographic images have come
>>>from very
>>>difficult negatives.
>>>Difficult as in way over or under exposed;
>>>Not in focus or otherwise soft.
>>>Poorly composed.
>>>A decent image was made from them with someone in the darkroom who
>>>knew what
>>>they were doing.
>>>Now its a bit easier to do those things.
>>>And by a lot more people.
>>>So what?
>>>
>>>A lot more people have Photoshop and are good at it than had
>>>darkrooms and
>>>were good at it.
>>>
>>>This offends the small proud darkroom club.
>>>Those of us who were able to swing darkrooms.
>>>
>>>I for one am very glad that photography has been made more
>>>democratic.
>>>If that's the word.
>>>More for everybody.
>>>Not just those who could swing darkrooms.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Mark William Rabiner
>>>markrabiner.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Leica Users Group.
>>>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>Chris Saganich, MS, Sr. Physicist
>>Weill Medical College of Cornell University
>>New York Presbyterian Hospital
>>chs2018@med.cornell.edu
>>http://intranet.med.cornell.edu/research/health_phys/
>>Ph. 212.746.6964
>>Fax. 212.746.4800
>>Office A-0049
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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

Chris Saganich, MS, Sr. Physicist
Weill Medical College of Cornell University
New York Presbyterian Hospital
chs2018@med.cornell.edu
http://intranet.med.cornell.edu/research/health_phys/
Ph. 212.746.6964
Fax. 212.746.4800
Office A-0049 



Replies: Reply from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] Not Buying M8)
In reply to: Message from amr3 at uwm.edu (amr3@uwm.edu) ([Leica] Not Buying M8)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Not Buying M8)
Message from chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich) ([Leica] Not Buying M8)
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] Not Buying M8)