What is Michael Reichmann's 'schtick'?
I have been visiting Michael Reichmann's site for a while, and have picked up some useful information there, however, there is something nagging about his web-site...
I have wanted to ask all of you a burning question for a while, but I don't want to start a flame-war...So I will ask it very 'delicately'; what is his 'schtick'? By that, I mean, I don't know the guy in person, but unless I'm totally missing the point, he seems to be a bit of a shill for the major players in the whole digital camera movement. There seems to be a sub-text in his writings which leads me to believe, perhaps erroneously, that he's not really fully 'independent'...
I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but I'm curious as to what his motives might be...
Max Power, he's the man who's name you'd love to touch! But you mustn't touch! His name sounds good in your ear, but when you say it, you mustn't fear! 'Cause his name can be said by anyone!
To make money.
Originally Posted by Max Power
Let's see what I've got in the magic trash can for Mateo!
I just saw his show at Picto here in toronto, I found it to be mediocre to say the least.
I have been following this fellows web site for a few years, he does have a lot to offer but always starts listing his credentials (which are not that impressive) to prove that his product is the right one if challanged on what he says.
I went into the colour correction area of his web site and was suprised to find he spoke in painting terms for colour correction. PS is based on photographic colour theory and I was thinking that any young person trying to colour correct using his methods would be misled and very confused.
He is a very big proponent of inkjet and his website is formidable but looking at end product very mid level competent,IMO .
On the digital side and ink jet printing I believe he has a lot to offer , I would not get bent out of shape over his schtick.
I would think he is a big player in the Camera Club Crowd and wields a very big stick there.
I check his site occasionally, but rarely find anything useful for my methods. I think it's a great site for the digital equipment junkies though.
The only reason I ever visited his website was to read Mike Johnston's column. I lost interest otherwise.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Seems like a clunky website done by a rich guy who likes to play expert. His photography could be stronger but he works hard, and it takes money and cojones to talk your way into those ship-breaking yards in Sri Lanka. I wish I had his P25 Contax set up!
Pretty much the same for me. He seems to be so in love with digital that image quality gets lost. Not that you can't do lovely images with digital, but the final image is the point, not the road you took to get there.
Originally Posted by Lee Shively
Honey, I promise no more searching eBay for cameras.
What I didn't like about the ship breaking yard images is , Burtynsky then before him Monk then before him Salgado. These three photographers covered this subject in different styles as I imagine others have. This fellow did not bring anything new to the table (basically copied Burtynsky's vision and nowhere near as impressive).
When Russel Monk photographed at this location he had absolutely no problem getting into the ships top and bottom. His show was impressive and was not a photo stop on the way to the hotel.
Amazing location and a very hard life for these workers.
I agree, and I'm sure we all would have made the most of the opportunity to photograph at such an incredible location, but I'd hate to second guess anyone's images from the Third World. Not getting robbed, puking your guts out or getting shot is an accomplishment in itself.
I don't know how to judge his print quality from the website jpgs (which look fine) but given that you've seen his prints, what was bad about them? Compared to other large Epson prints? If it is your dislike of Espon inkjets versus tradtional materials that is understandable, or were his prints just bad in terms of being off in where he placed the tones?
Of course, now that I think about it, he tends to show sunsets and backlite reflections, or simple centered tourist shots of native's caught unaware or of construction workers on steel work - sounds pretty awful in its own right!
I think you touched on what I find objectionable. Amongst images of sunsets , pretty landscapes , there were these images of these yards. I think the taking of these images were to easy for him and just to be positioned this way with other pretty objects , just does not make any sense to me. He should work hard to get outstanding images like others before him and make it a complete show and then maybe I would find his work more interesting.
Regarding his print quality, as I stated before I only knew of his work from his website. I got the impression that I was going to see a masters work, craftmanship at its loftiest level. What I viewed were two or three outstanding prints and the rest mediocre to good.
I print inkjet as well as other end media and was suprised at the real print vs what the web site said I was to see in his work.
Like any end photographic media one can produce work of outstanding quality and I must say this show I saw was not that.
As far as Epsons go , they were good but not outstanding.