[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Rollei] Re: 2.8gx or 2.8f
- Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: 2.8gx or 2.8f
- From: "Julian Thomas" <julianthomas
- Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 09:23:31 +0200
- References: <B7E6732D.5C4F%john >
I could be reacting to the past 12 months where I've shot exclusively 35mm.
But I am really enjoying my 'flex. One camera/body, light, take it anywhere
and lurvely negs, and that intriguing square format which I've never shot in
before (always 6x7 5x4 or 35mm) - but I'm sure I'll head back to 35mm for
some wild sp.
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Johnny Deadman" <john >
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 3:01 AM
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: 2.8gx or 2.8f
> on 10/7/01 11:59 AM, Julian Thomas at julianthomas wrote:
> > I've only been trying to make a living out of photography for a little
> > a year now, but if I knew at the start what I know now... I wouldn't
> > bothered with any expensive 35mm gear - I haven't used it since I got
> > flex. I'd have bought a flex, and a technical camera, maybe a Wista RF
> > local dealer has one with a linhof handle on), and just shot pictures.
> that's an interesting perspective
> luckily I don't have to make a living out of photography, and have never
> sold a picture for money (some other stuff, but not money). But I agree
> most of the stuff Julian says above except for the 35mm bit... using
> formats has made me truly appreciative of Leicas.
> I have a bunch of cameras but I wouldn't call myself a junkie. Really, the
> only reason I buy new (to me) cameras is that they let me do something I
> couldn't technically do before.
> But no-one should underestimate the value of the shift in gestalt when you
> change cameras. There is a world of difference between going out to shoot
> with a 35mm camera and a 4x5, and nothing to do with the size of the
> negative. One of the most important things you can do to move forward
> creatively is BREAK YOUR HABITS and very often changing equipment can
> achieve this. (There are plenty of other ways).
> Habits in photography are the equivalent of pattern-playing in music, and
> anyone who has winced at yet another bar-room Eric Clapton knows how
> it can be to listen to pattern-playing, no matter how many thousand notes
> second it allows you to achieve.
> Most of us would rather hear one note by Miles Davis than a thousand by a
> pub-rock Clapton.
> In the same way sometimes you have to interrupt your flow of photographs
> making life difficult for yourself. "Think of a note, and don't play it".
> new camera is one way of doing that. Putting the camera down is another.
> There are plenty more.
> Ansel Adams confessed towards the end of his life that he'd made a living
> copying himself for 50 years. I have nothing against AA, but I would have
> liked to see the pictures he might have made if he had not done so. Garry
> Winogrand similarly said shortly before his death that he was thinking of
> buying an 8x10 and going back to NYC to make portraits. I would have liked
> to see those too. Would they have been any good? Probably not at first,
> they would have led somewhere else... and that might have been
> John Brownlow