Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/11/28

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

Subject: [Leica] Fuji X 100 versus Leica M9
From: tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 20:14:08 -0800
References: <20121129005201.VBVL8874.eastrmfepo103.cox.net@eastrmimpo209>

jon.streeter OFFERED:
>My apologies for bringing up the ugly "b" word.  It is not my intention to 
>be the agent of another's distress."<< Subject: Re: [Leica] Fuji X 100 
>versus Leica M9

Hi Jon,
No need to apologize lad. :-) I have no distress over it quite simply 
because I don't care about it and never have any of the many many clients 
I've shot for. Simply because I don't relate to bokeh any more today than I 
have in the past 62 years as a published photojournalist!  Like, it's a no 
never mind, no brainer item! :-)

I actually thought a few years ago it was funny how many others on the LUG 
were freaking out over the good, bad and ugly of it. When for all my 50 plus 
years I'd never encountered / recognized it myself nor ever heard about it!! 
Nor in comment from clients.

But then I've never been the brightest photog on the block, only because I 
never think about it and just do photography! WHY? Because I've loved it 
with great passion since my first camera was handed to me by my dear 
departed wife, Irene for my first birthday after we were married:  15 
October 1949!  That birthday was May 27, 1950! And my first newspaper 
published photo was. 17 September, 1951. And I have been published every 
year and many many months since, some place. :-)  Just love it.

As I'm sure you know by now, I'm a great believer in the "KISS THEORY!" 
Don't sweat it! Just do it without thought! :-) Damn it's so beautiful why 
waste time knocking ones brains out over so many no never mind things. More 
fun just shooting and enjoying the moments and results than whatever so many 
others beat themselves up over!

Hell man! "Click" is all you want to hear, enjoy the results! :-) Have a 
nice day and don't sweat it! :-) :-)

cheers,
Dr. ted :-)






> Your credentials are impressive.  They give your opinion extra weight, of 
> course.  After all, people have paid you for your work.  I would offer the 
> observation that Van Gogh did not sell a single painting, but his work, 
> nonetheless, is highly prized.  Atget's photographs were discovered after 
> his death, if I recall correctly.
>
> Bokeh is something I've been aware of since early on.  I certainly noticed 
> the lack of it with my Nikon lenses after selling my M3.  I can recall to 
> mind a number of my photographs I love partly because of the bokeh, 
> portraits with the sun turning a backlit tree into a jewel box for a 
> background, another portrait with out-of-focus highlights from the knobs 
> on a fifties-era stove in the background, and others.
>
> Since bokeh can't be accurately previewed with a rangefinder, one uses 
> one's imagination.  People, oh, like me, for example, who are enamored of 
> beautiful bokeh, can also shoot for composition, timing, subject, color, 
> contrast, juxtaposition of diverse but dramatic elements, and whatever 
> else makes a shot.  Imagine two photographs identical (as in "identical") 
> in every way except bokeh.  Are we to assume nobody would spot the 
> difference?  Perhaps some would, but they would simply shrug and say, it's 
> not important; I'll buy the one with the ugly bokeh?  That the 
> photographer would tell his clients and post in his bio that he's never 
> noticed the difference so he bought the lenses with ugly bokeh because he 
> figured nobody would care, and, besides, they were cheaper?  That even 
> though the raison d'etre of a photograph is to be looked AT, it doesn't 
> really matter what it looks LIKE?
>
> My apologies for bringing up the ugly "b" word.  It is not my intention to 
> be the agent of another's distress.
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Bill Pearce" <billcpearce at cox.net>
> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: [Leica] Fuji X 100 versus Leica M9
> Date: Wed, Nov 28, 2012 2:29 pm
>
>
> I'm with Dr. Ted. I've been shooting since the late sixties, mostly 
> professionally, and never thought about that. I could see examples before 
> I knew what it was where really bad Bokeh was disturbing, but that wasn't 
> very often and I didn't loose sleep. I have been told that Nikon has a big 
> problem with Bokeh, and I sure shot a lot of stuff for pay with those bad 
> nikkors, and heard no complaints.
>
> -----Original Message----- From: tedgrant at shaw.ca
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:37 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Fuji X 100 versus Leica M9
>
> "BOKEH?" Every time this word / effect raises it's head on the LUG I never
> even knew the word nor what it meant for at least the first 50 years of
> shooting. :-)
>
> Then I joined the LUG  and one day it raised it's ugly little head and of
> course went on for days, good, bad and ugly! :-) Meanwhile I'm wondering
> "what the hell are these guys talking about?"  Then I was informed it was
> all about the background out of focus effect! And where had I been for my
> first 50 years not knowing this?
>
> Well heck my answer was quite simple. :-) I  always shot for the maximum
> impact of the subject as that was always what I thought was most 
> important.
> Surprise! One day I was told .... "No the Bokeh is just as important as it
> helps the subject look better!"
>
> Me?  "Really?"  So what the hell have I been doing wrong and successfully
> for 50 years and never knew the word existed?   The effect? "Yes." But it
> just never mattered!
>
> Oh well the usual thing. Different effects for different folks. :-)
>
> Although I now admit I am aware of it in how it separates details in some
> situations.   BUT? Do I pay attention to it as I'm shooting? Never enters 
> my
> mind! Only on days like this when once a again the "ugly" ;-) little word
> appears on my screen and I sigh and delete! ;-) "Have a nice Bokeh day
> lads!" :-)
>
> cheers,
> Dr. ted :-)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information 



In reply to: Message from jon.streeter at cox.net (jon.streeter) ([Leica] Fuji X 100 versus Leica M9)