David Muench - B&W images

[photomc]

Has anyone else seen the B&W work by David Muench that is in the current issue of View Camera? Have admired his work for some time, but was unaware of any B&W work and must say, I would love to see some in person.

If you haven't seen the work, pick up a copy..it's is worth it - IMHO..

 

[matt miller]

I agree. The opening shot with the low sun and large boulders is fantastic. Some of his photos appear to be too dark for my tastes though. I'm sure they're better in hand.

The current issue of VC is, IMO, one of the best to date. Maybe it's just because most of the content is of interest to me. Regardless, kudos to Simmons for this issue.

 

[scootermm]

The current issue of VC is, IMO, one of the best to date. Maybe it's just because most of the content is of interest to me. Regardless, kudos to Simmons for this issue.

I have to fully agree with this.
truly is a great issue. I love the Ikebana article especially. Im not a still life photographer in the least bit but these images and the article are wonderful.

 

[philldresser]

I agree that this is one of the best from a portfolio perspective. The standard is excellent.

I would be interested to here Sand Kings response tothe Pyrocat-PMK comparison. Any comments Sandy?

Plus I would love a 5x4 version of the cooke triple lens

Phill

 

[roteague]

Has anyone else seen the B&W work by David Muench that is in the current issue of View Camera? Have admired his work for some time, but was unaware of any B&W work and must say, I would love to see some in person.

If you haven't seen the work, pick up a copy..it's is worth it - IMHO..

Unfortunately, I am still waiting on it to hit the bookstores. Just checked Barnes and Nobles yesterday, they still have the last issue. But, I am excited with all I hear about it.

 

[mobtown_4x5]

Plus I would love a 5x4 version of the cooke triple lens

Phill

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

anyone want to start an e-mail/letter/petition campaign?

How about picketing, sit-ins...

Matt

 

[Tom Duffy]

It's ironic. I've been trying to pare down the number of magazines I subscribe to. I decided that View Camera was one I could let go. Ex of the Color portfolios, everything seemed to be duplicated someplace else, or was survey info easily availble through google. Then this porfolio laden issue comes along and it was so good that i had to buy it.

I read Gordon Hutchings review of the Cooke convertable and I couldn't help thinking that it was a little too glowing. I find it hard to believe that a convertable lens, down to a single element can match the performance of a modern optic, yet that's what Gordon seems to be implying. A simple comparison under a 10x magnifier of a Cooke negative vs. the same pic taken with an apo-symmar doesn't seem that difficult to do.

The PMK vs. Pyrocat was actually good in that there was a detailed comparison, within the limits of published pictures. Again it misses mentioning that Pryocat works in a Jobo and PMK doesn't.

 

[philldresser]

The PMK vs. Pyrocat was actually good in that there was a detailed comparison, within the limits of published pictures. Again it misses mentioning that Pryocat works in a Jobo and PMK doesn't.

Personally I don't think this was a completely fair or detailed comparison. In fact I thought it was particulary biased to PMK. I also thought it strange that no mention was made of Pyrocat-HD's founder, Sandy King or that some fairly serious articles/studies have been published on this developer.

It seemed to me the that the exposure was determined for a polaroid 55 and then replicated at the known ISO for a PMK neg, expecting Pyrocat to have the same characteristics. Proof that it hasn't is that the shadow detail was reduced. So, give it more exposure i.e change the film speed. It is documented well that Pyrocat retains film speed. The results that Steve S got could be attributed to slight under exposure and therefore being represented further down the curve. I might be wrong of course but thats how I see it.

Please someone tell me if this is wrong

However, the rest of the mag was top dollar.

Phill

 

[roy]

Personally I don't think this was a detailed comparison

It was the sort of report that would reassure anyone thinking that they might give Pyrocat a trial, not to bother and stick with PMK.

 

[David Vickery]

"I read Gordon Hutchings review of the Cooke convertable and I couldn't help thinking that it was a little too glowing. I find it hard to believe that a convertable lens, down to a single element can match the performance of a modern optic, yet that's what Gordon seems to be implying. A simple comparison under a 10x magnifier of a Cooke negative vs. the same pic taken with an apo-symmar doesn't seem that difficult to do."

Hey Tom, It isn't really all that hard to believe that the lens can perform well with just one lens cell. The front and rear cells are each made up of four Elements separated by a very specific air space--so specific that you could almost consider it as a fifth element--sorta like in the movie! So each cell has as many elements as a tessar, which obviously perform quite well with only four elements.

 

[Tom Duffy]

Thanks, David, for the clarification. I read "cell" and substituted "element" in my mental translation.