Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,329   Posts: 1,682,015   Online: 820
      
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 84
  1. #31
    Nikon Collector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Carolina Beach, NC
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by summicron1 View Post
    large digital slrs have pretty much destroyed the concept of "candid photography" in the news business. Bring out one of those monsters and people automatically perform.

    Decades ago the dictum of LIFE photographers was that you had to become invisible -- and with a small Leica or Nikon, both very quiet, you could. It is impossible to do so with a massive lensed DSLR, or even a film SLR, and while they do get a lot of different shots than you can with a small rangefinder, the is an intimacy that is lost. LIFE's brilliant photo story by W. Eugene Smith about a day in the life of a country doctor would have been impossible, or at least a lot harder, to shoot by a photographer loaded down with the usual couple of hulking giant lensed cameras.

    Of course, very few photographers today are W. Eugene Smith, too. I keep saying, great photography is 5 percent what yu shoot with, 95 percent you.

    http://life.time.com/history/life-cl...ntry-doctor/#1

    how much you? The article says that Smith spent several days with the doctor taking pictures with no film in the camera so the doctor could get used to Smith, and he spent several weeks on this one assignment. There is no news publication in the country today that would spend that kind of staff time/money. Maybe a freelancer could do it, I dunno. And then nobody publishes that sort of photo essay any more either, so what does it matter?
    A shame, and what are my granddaughters gonna show their grandchildren

  2. #32
    Nikon Collector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Carolina Beach, NC
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by LightBurn Photo View Post
    ahha) I do get looks, but mainly coz of the unusual skin colour of my cameras!

    Attachment 75145
    NICE!

  3. #33
    Eric Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Calgary AB, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,309
    Images
    61
    It's a status thing. People are so conditioned to look for labels so they can "rate" you. Nothing more than that imho.

    I was accosted by one gentleman who demanded to know what camera I was using. I had all identifying marking covered by black tape. He was incensed that I wouldn't tell him. The point I was trying to make to him was that it's not the camera that makes the photographer (sorry Leica fanboys). Mind you he was wearing highly labelled expensive clothing so brand was very important to him. So sad.
    Last edited by Eric Rose; 10-04-2013 at 06:39 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    www.ericrose.com
    yourbaddog.com

    "civility is not a sign of weakness" JFK

    "The Dude abides" - the Dude

  4. #34
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,435
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Rose View Post
    It's a status thing. People are so conditioned to look for labels so they can "rate" you. Nothing more than that imho.

    I was accosted by one gentleman who demanded to know what camera I was using. I had all identifying marking covered by black tape. He was incensed that I wouldn't tell him. The point I was trying to make to him was that it's not the camera that makes the photographer (sorry Leica fanboys). Mind you he was wearing highly labelled expensive clothing so brand was very important to him. So sad.
    sorry, buyI really think that name-brand equipment increases your chances to get a better image. The photograph is still made by the 12 inches behind the camera but famous brands are sought aftr for good reason!
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,419
    No, but my 35mm Stereo Realist sure does.

  6. #36
    John_Nikon_F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Duvall, WA, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,560
    Images
    2
    In my case, if I'm shooting an F, F2AS, or F3P without a motor drive, no. If I'm shooting one with a drive, or an F4 or F5, yes. Especially the last two. Partly because they kinda look like DSLR's, even though both have rewind cranks and one still has a somewhat analog interface.

    -J
    APUG: F3P, F2AS, Nikomat FT2
    DPUG: D2x
    Nikkors: 18-70/3.5-4.5G AF-S DX (f/D2x), 20/3.5 UD, 24/2 AI, 35/2 O, 50/2 H, 50/1.4 S, 85/1.8 K, 105/4 Micro AIS, 180/2.8 PC
    'tax gear: Spot II, 55/1.8 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar

    My FB - My flickr stream
    My SmugMug

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Castle Rock, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,756
    Images
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by summicron1 View Post
    large digital slrs have pretty much destroyed the concept of "candid photography" in the news business. Bring out one of those monsters and people automatically perform.

    Decades ago the dictum of LIFE photographers was that you had to become invisible -- and with a small Leica or Nikon, both very quiet, you could. It is impossible to do so with a massive lensed DSLR, or even a film SLR, and while they do get a lot of different shots than you can with a small rangefinder, the is an intimacy that is lost. LIFE's brilliant photo story by W. Eugene Smith about a day in the life of a country doctor would have been impossible, or at least a lot harder, to shoot by a photographer loaded down with the usual couple of hulking giant lensed cameras.

    Of course, very few photographers today are W. Eugene Smith, too. I keep saying, great photography is 5 percent what yu shoot with, 95 percent you.

    http://life.time.com/history/life-cl...ntry-doctor/#1

    how much you? The article says that Smith spent several days with the doctor taking pictures with no film in the camera so the doctor could get used to Smith, and he spent several weeks on this one assignment. There is no news publication in the country today that would spend that kind of staff time/money. Maybe a freelancer could do it, I dunno. And then nobody publishes that sort of photo essay any more either, so what does it matter?
    Well, sort of.

    The story I read said he shot for a whole month without film. And that LIFE was not at all pleased that he was taking so long for this story. And it pretty much ended his association with them. But man, it is a wonderful piece of work.
    “You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live.” - John Galt

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Rose View Post
    It's a status thing. People are so conditioned to look for labels so they can "rate" you. Nothing more than that imho.
    I was accosted by one gentleman who demanded to know what camera I was using. I had all identifying marking covered by black tape. He was incensed that I wouldn't tell him. The point I was trying to make to him was that it's not the camera that makes the photographer (sorry Leica fanboys). Mind you he was wearing highly labelled expensive clothing so brand was very important to him. So sad.
    I believe you're correct.
    Last summer some yobbo asked me "what is the zoom ratio of that lens?".
    I was carrying a Nikkormat FTN with the 28/3.5 Nikkor-H, all circa 1970.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    The OP has obviously never used a Hasselblad or 4"x5" camera.
    Indubitably.
    I recommended he try a mahogany 8x10.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    Images
    3
    Great thread.. When I go out with my trl, I most certainly get a lot of positive response. Most question is can you get film. Absolutely! I reply. I can't get at Walgreens, but order on line at B and H photo, In bricks. A lot of people do the cartoon double take.. They'll walk by me and take a double take and sometime come up ask questions. A lot of times they'll make comments like " What a beautiful camera"! I was talking to one guy and he told me that he has a RB67 that he doesn't use anymore because it cost to to much per photo. 12 cents a shot. I said.. When I'm confined to 12 shots per roll, I'm really careful on what I expose my film too. Thus better pictures in general. I really think there's a place in photography for both film and digital. I got to say tho.. Film cameras are more beautiful in appearance.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin