Ziggy played guitar...

[Alex Benjamin]

...and shot Olympus.

 

[Cholentpot]

...and kept both eyes open.

 

[M-88]

I'd say his eyes were one ... okay, two of his most defining features, so why not?

 

[oxcanary]

Nerd time - I reckon OM2 SP or OM4ti because hot shoe looks integral.

 

[snusmumriken]

Looked quite healthy at that time.

 

[M-88]

Nerd time - I reckon OM2 SP or OM4ti because hot shoe looks integral.

It was neither. It's Bowie, it had to be OM-3.

Jokes aside, though:

Ricochet: David Bowie 1983 by Denis O'Regan | Thin White Duke

Denis O'Regan is publishing a limited edition fine art book of rare intimate photographs of David Bowie entitled ‘Ricochet: David Bowie 1983’.

www.thinwhiteduke.net

 

[foc]

...and kept both eyes open.

A handy little skill. That way you can see what's outside the field of view and so make a change to the composition, anticipate people walking into frame etc.

 

[grain elevator]

A handy little skill. That way you can see what's outside the field of view and so make a change to the composition, anticipate people walking into frame etc.

But is it even possible with a long lens like the one pictured, as opposed to one that gives a viewfinder image close to 1:1? I think he's likely just posing. The left hand is a bit off as well, experienced photographers usualy have the lens resting on the index finger/open hand rather than on the thumb.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I keep both eyes open when I use my 8x10...

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

...it took years of practice...

 

[Cholentpot]

But is it even possible with a long lens like the one pictured, as opposed to one that gives a viewfinder image close to 1:1? I think he's likely just posing. The left hand is a bit off as well, experienced photographers usualy have the lens resting on the index finger/open hand rather than on the thumb.

I can answer my question though. Dave had one busted up eye. Also, I tend to hold some lenses like this as I have a busted wrist from shenanigans as a youngn'

 

[Helios 1984]

Looked quite healthy at that time.

That’s during the Thin White Duke period, at the peak of his cocaine addiction. Remember Station to Station? Bowie had no recollection of ever writing or recording the album.

 

[foc]

But is it even possible with a long lens like the one pictured, as opposed to one that gives a viewfinder image close to 1:1? I think he's likely just posing. The left hand is a bit off as well, experienced photographers usualy have the lens resting on the index finger/open hand rather than on the thumb.

I have used this method for years (shooting professionally) on all lens ranges, wide to telephoto. Photographing weddings, it came in very handy, to check no one was about to walk into shot. It also made me aware of my surroundings.

Also, ideally, Bowie should have cupped the lens in his hand, it helps steady the camera and there is less arm/wrist movement.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

That’s during the Thin White Duke period, at the peak of his cocaine addiction. Remember Station to Station? Bowie had no recollection of ever writing or recording the album.

An affinity for Peruvian Marching Powder and that kind of income will do that. Glad he made it through that fairly intact.

 

[Helios 1984]

An affinity for Peruvian Marching Powder and that kind of income will do that. Glad he made it through that fairly intact.

You know you're doing too much drug when Keith Richards is worried about you.

 

[Ben 4]

Saw him play LA's "Fabulous Forum" on the Station to Station tour—wish it had been the Ziggy period.

 

[Flighter]

Nerd time (2)

I know that in the article M-88 linked Denis O'Regan said that "For the entire tour I used my favourite ever film camera, the Olympus OM-3, two or three camera bodies and 135mm & 24mm f2.8 lenses" but in the picture (copied below for ease of reference) David Bowie is holding either an OM1 or OM2.

The give aways are (compare with photos below):

A - only the OM1 & OM2 had a flash synch socket (selectable between FP and X) high up on the side of the lens mount/mirror box, on the OM2SP, OM3 and OM 4 there was a PC sync socket at the bottom of the lens mount/mirror box and a 5 pin socket for use with the Olympus T-series flash on the vertical front face below the rewind knob.

B - there is no 5 pin socket on the vertical front face below the rewind knob (in the pictures below of the OM2SP & OM3 the 5 pin socket has the socket cover in place)

C - there is little in the way of a gap between the bottom of the rewind knob and the top plate; on the OM2SP the rewind knob sits a little higher due to the presence of the mode selector switch and on the OM3 and 4 the rewind knob is higher still due to the ISO selector and exposure compensation dial

D - the 'OLYMPUS' name is vertical and close to the top of the lens mount; on the OM2SP that section of the pentaprism housing slopes backwards, on the OM3 and OM4 there is a bigger gap between the top of the lens mount and the vertical face of the pentaprism housing, also there is no sign in the picture of the finder light window which sits above the 'OLYMPUS' name on the OM3 and OM4.

Olympus OM1N with 135mm f2.8 lens

Olympus OM2SP with same lens

Olympus OM3 with same lens

 

[rulnacco]

Only tangentially related--sorry!--but those OMs, as many of you know, could produce some fantastic shots. (I don't own one myself, although I've been tempted several times.)

One day several years ago I was wandering around the backstreets of the Deptford area of southeast London, and in an old storefront I could see a gentleman hanging photos on the wall, clearly in preparation for an exhibition. Curious, I knocked, and he admitted me. It turned out to be Peter Anderson, a former photographer with the NME.

He was hanging nearly four-foot high prints of many musicians I recognised, including a very young Madonna, Joe Strummer, Iggy Pop, Run-DMC, and many others--including, yes, David Bowie. They were of course grainy at that size, but the sharpness and detail they rendered was pretty incredible and held up very well indeed in such large prints. He told me that for most of his shoots, he just threw an OM1 with a lens attached into a coat pocket, with another lens or two in other pockets, and went out and met his subject for the magazine shoot.

I asked him how he processed such large prints, and he told me that back in the storeroom of the space he was using, he built a trough on the floor and actually mopped the chemicals across the prints! They really were amazing, and I came back to attend the opening exhibition, and bought the associated book.

His work isn't terrifically widely known, especially in the US, but it's quite good and well worth a look--plenty of real icons of music history in there. Definitely worth a look.

 

[MattKing]

Nerd time (2)

I know that in the article M-88 linked Denis O'Regan said that "For the entire tour I used my favourite ever film camera, the Olympus OM-3, two or three camera bodies and 135mm & 24mm f2.8 lenses" but in the picture (copied below for ease of reference) David Bowie is holding either an OM1 or OM2.

View attachment 343472

The give aways are (compare with photos below):

A - only the OM1 & OM2 had a flash synch socket (selectable between FP and X) high up on the side of the lens mount/mirror box, on the OM2SP, OM3 and OM 4 there was a PC sync socket at the bottom of the lens mount/mirror box and a 5 pin socket for use with the Olympus T-series flash on the vertical front face below the rewind knob.

B - there is no 5 pin socket on the vertical front face below the rewind knob (in the pictures below of the OM2SP & OM3 the 5 pin socket has the socket cover in place)

C - there is little in the way of a gap between the bottom of the rewind knob and the top plate; on the OM2SP the rewind knob sits a little higher due to the presence of the mode selector switch and on the OM3 and 4 the rewind knob is higher still due to the ISO selector and exposure compensation dial

D - the 'OLYMPUS' name is vertical and close to the top of the lens mount; on the OM2SP that section of the pentaprism housing slopes backwards, on the OM3 and OM4 there is a bigger gap between the top of the lens mount and the vertical face of the pentaprism housing, also there is no sign in the picture of the finder light window which sits above the 'OLYMPUS' name on the OM3 and OM4.

Olympus OM1N with 135mm f2.8 lens

View attachment 343473

Olympus OM2SP with same lens

View attachment 343475

Olympus OM3 with same lens

View attachment 343474

Excellent OM nerdism!
I tried to do a little bit of that, but you were able to pull way more from the original image than I was.

 

[Flighter]

Thanks Matt.

And cool story rulnacco, always nice hearing about OMs in use, and thanks for the link to Peter Anderson's work.