I'm going to start wearing a bandana when I use my Leicas. Bandanas worked for Keith, so he must be onto something.
Bresson wore cravats. Which pretty much is French for bandana. Coincidence? I think not.
Rockwell may be relatively successful but I seriously doubt he is as famous, rich or successful as Mr. Richards.
It was from the 1950s, well before they invented the Selectric balls. It was like the old manuals only it had a giant motor. I was a slow typist so it sounded like I was taking target practice. If you were a fast typist, it sounded more like a machine gun. It was a thrill a minute to type on. A great feeling of power when you strapped yourself in to type a paper.You can still get those little type balls and ribbons should you find your typewriter.
It does seem to be the case that some people think having a Leica or Rolleiflex of Hasselblad will make them a better photographer. But the way it actually works: a reliable, high quality camera does what you want it to, so, if you make good photos, you're the one who did it and, if you make bad photos, you're the one who did it. It's not that you can credit the equipment - it's that you can't blame it.
Also, regarding quality and grain and abnormalities and defects: most photos are boring and all that stuff can make the mundane more interesting. People already see the world free of grain and (unless they have the wrong glasses) tack sharp. Show them something different.
This generally applies just as much when one has mediocre photographic equipment.I agree when one has high end photographic equipment, if the photograph(s) are not good, the user has only himself or herself to blame.
... if one has broken photographic equipment.
I think its high time you presented your portfolio for us to see. I mean, if you are getting superior images from your Leica, its time you shared them with us!
The saddest is when you have broken high-end equipment.This generally applies just as much when one has mediocre photographic equipment.
It doesn't apply nearly as much if one has broken photographic equipment.
Rockwell may be relatively successful but I seriously doubt he is as famous, rich or successful as Mr. Richards.
This generally applies just as much when one has mediocre photographic equipment.
I hate grain and the fuzziness.
I don't think grain is interesting
I’m so high in the art of photography that you wouldn’t understand. Depends on your level.
Lately I’m into ultra minimalism. Yesterday I fixed a blank sheet and I called it “Life”. You want to see it?
Translation: "I don't produce anything - I just have opinions about EVERYTHING"
Been there, done that.The saddest is when you have broken high-end equipment.
I am pretty sure the opinions part is correct.Well, if you count the 22,000 prints I’ve done in the darkroom this past year alone, it probably is something more like “I have valid opinions on analog photography”
I agree when one has high end photographic equipment, if the photograph(s) are not good, the user has only himself or herself to blame.
This generally applies just as much when one has mediocre photographic equipment.
It doesn't apply nearly as much if one has broken photographic equipment.
Once the mediocre equipment becomes broken equipment, it is fine to blame it, if you wish.It doesn't, because mediocre equipment is more prone to failure - it's less reliable - and it tends not to do what it purports to do very well. That's true of all mediocre equipment, not just cameras.
The problem is not with discussing a particular product's quality, is it?
As long as there's good whiskey on said glass...
I'm going to start wearing a bandana when I use my Leicas. Bandanas worked for Keith, so he must be onto something.
Bresson wore cravats. Which pretty much is French for bandana. Coincidence? I think not.
Thanks Flavio... maybe a glass of Cachaça instead? I love caipirinha, one of my favorite drinks.Hey, Flavio, el chico chistoso! Hahaha!
Thanks Flavio... maybe a glass of Cachaça instead? I love caipirinha, one of my favorite drinks.
I think its high time you presented your portfolio for us to see. I mean, if you are getting superior images from your Leica, its time you shared them with us!
I think its high time you presented your portfolio for us to see. I mean, if you are getting superior images from your Leica, its time you shared them with us!
One from the fixing bath, as we speak.
Blurry. Rolleicord, blue filter, acros, ilford satin rc, hc110
View attachment 282592
A well employed Olympus Trip 35 is overall more likely to create good results than a poorly employed Leica - of whatever vintage. Heck, a well employed Instamatic 124 is overall more likely to create good results than a poorly employed Leica - in all the very wide range of circumstances that are suited to the Instamatic 124.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?