[Leica] Journalist buys a Leica!/Reinvigoration

[steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)]

On Dec 30, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Greg Rubenstein <gcr910 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Warning: rant at fine-art photographers
> 
> Read with interest the piece about the journalist buying a Leica and
> how it reinvigorated her interest in photography. I know exactly what
> she felt and how she feels. Am sure many working photographers,
> journalists, amateurs and others who use cameras have had similar
> experiences.
> 
> Back in the 80s and 90s as cameras became increasingly automated, I
> began to feel disengaged. Nothing to do with my commitment to
> photography, but I felt less essential to the process -- despite the
> fact that my eyes, vision and results were the keys to getting work.
> 
> Bought my first Leica to help me "regain my chops." Had to manually
> focus the thing. Had to set its aperture. Had to select a shutter
> speed. Even began using my handheld light meters more. It was
> re-engaging and reinvigorating. And continues to be. My commitment
> never wavered. Today I own only Leica gear. Other stuff for work or
> personal projects is easily rented as needed.
> 
> Also, there have been and are times when I cannot be in two places at
> once. I am an omnivorous viewer of images and portfolios. Having
> viewed so much, I will say publicly, and knowing full well that I'm
> offending some people, I have never hired a photographer with the
> appellation "fine art" on his or her card, resume or portfolio, and
> won't recommend a fine-art photographer to someone seeking a shooter.
> 
> Why?
> 
> Based on the limits of my experience and viewing, and the anecdotal
> experiences of others in my sphere, I have found that fine-art
> photographers:
> 
> -- have attitude ("If buying a new camera 'reinvigorated' her interest
> in photography, then she has never really been that committed to it
> anyway. Sad thing is, this airhead has a job with a major newspaper."
> being a typical example of such attitude.),
> -- lack a necessary understanding of photographs as communication, and
> -- do not understand or willfully ignore the needs of businesses that
> hire them or other customers who pay them.
> 
> This is my experience and my prejudice as a photographer and as
> someone who has hired photographers, as well as someone who spends a
> fair amount of his time with photographers. I have yet to meet a
> fine-art photographer who grasps any of the concepts mentioned above
> except attitude.
> 
> Fact is, I bristle when someone tells me one of my images is artistic.
> At one of the finest design and photographic programs in America, The
> Institute of Design at Illinois Institute of Technology (a college
> created by many of the Bauhaus school -- Laszlo Moholy-Nagy among them
> -- when they fled the Nazis) "art" borders on being a dirty word.
> 
> Think hard, then hold your tongues and thoughts, fine-arts
> photographers, when you publicly question others' commitments to
> photography or "photographic purity."
> 
> End of Sunday rant. Anyone in the mood to respond, feel free to fire
> back publicly or off list.
> 
> Thank you.


my take,  seems like  " take pictures, lots....no label,  let them define 
themselves.....let someone else define them,

if a picture of an ancient defunct gas station is called art by someone, so 
be it....

it is what it is...



Steve  (never an art major, not an artist,  always attracted to art, also to 
images)











> 
> Greg Rubenstein
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information