Kevin M Bourque

A new article,

Confessions of a recovering magic bullet chaser has been posted on largeformatphotography.info. [Note: this was posted by QTL using KB's address so that KB would be emailed any comments.]

Jorge Gasteazoro

Funy article, I have never been a magic bullet chaser, but have been a testaholic...as far as I am concerned, they share the same road to hell..:-))

John Kasaian

Oh how true! Well done!

__________________
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire"---GKC

Graeme Hird

Surely large format is the ultimate magic bullet!

Great article: so true of all of us.

__________________
If I were more creative, I'd write something witty here .....

www.scenebyhird.com

Arne Croell

Very true. And even after a cure, relapses are possible....

Bruce Wehman

Right on! And all the while, while reading, I found myself hoping to discover a new one.

Jim Galli

Excellently said. In my case, I have an incredibly short attention span, the revolving door of lenses and cameras and equipment have at least led to a rather high volume of prints making their way to the dumpster. Somewhere in that volume I've made the incremental gains that I would have anyway with 3 boring lenses and 1 boring camera. I keep telling myself I'm building the "system" that I will use for the remainder of my life. I also have to note that some of the magic bullet lenses that are the most costly, in particular I'm thinking of a 14" Kern Gold Dot Dagor are that popular for a good reason. There may be a kernal of truth to some of the hype. Or not. Let's see, I think I have a half a dozen lenses laying around in the garage that I've NEVER made a picture with. Maybe this weekend.

__________________
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep..to gain that which he cannot lose. Jim Elliot, 1949

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com

Mark_3632

Hello my name is Mark H. and I have chased magic bullets. It has been at least a week since I searched google for "photography+magic+bullet-effort"

Good essay

Paul Kierstead

Great article. It is kind of funny, but I am not sure that LF is really where it belongs. I play in the digital & 35mm (Canon gear in my case) too and frequent a few forums. There, I think magic bullets are even more common although I would have to admit the hype (no insult intended) surrounding pyro and AZO get close. In the 35mm/digital world, it is about lenses and bodies. "Oh, I got a 1D and the pictures are fab!". Pretty soon there are a flood of people looking for 1D's. Or 1Ds' for those who can afford it. Lenses go in waves too; a while back there was an absolute craze for Canon 85/1.2. A bunch of people went nuts for the 50/1.0. It is quite evident from a very large number of posts that many believe that equipment will indeed make them much better. Often you hear people saying "Oh, the non-IS version is sharper so I bought that one". Of course, the difference in sharpness would require a loupe on a 30x40 print.

At one level, I disagree with the article. Most prints are not bad because of non-parallel lens boards, or light-leaks or any other technical reason. The are bad because of a lack of vision and understanding. One of my favorite examples is sharpness: So many strive for ultimate sharpness, but don't understand apparent is different then actual sharpness. These are the people who won't shoot a lens like the 50/1.4 wide open (or even at F/2) because it is soft; the same people are bowled over when the see a "sharp" shot from said lens and think theirs are defective. Of course they fail to realize that the "sharp" photograph appears so because the photographer use a highly out of focus background to make emphasize his foreground. Most poor photographs happen because people don't select the right light, framing or depth of field (among other things).

A while back I lucked into sufficient means to be able to purchase some of the best glass that Canon has to offer. Once I owned that and have full control of my process, I came realize that I no longer had anything to blame for my poor results; I had all the best and my shots still sucked. I now had only myself to blame. Part of my move to LF was because of that; for me it was not another silver bullet but a way to reduce the technology and focus on the process. My photography has improved greatly since. I wish many of the people who are chasing things could have my opportunity to own some of the best and realize that it is themselves that need work, not their equipment.

OK, this has gotten long and a bit of a rant and is mostly non-LF but I think the short story is: Substitute some of the terminology and you can apply it to any photographic equipment genre. And even then, it is still the equipment behind the camera that is largely at fault.

John Kasaian

Would this mean that those of us who are manic obsessive over 19th & early 20th century lenses and processes are searching for a "magic artifact?"....sounds kind of Indiana Jones (I think I'm going to try a "magic fedora" for a lens shade!)...hmmm...then again, most of large format IS an artifact from the past! Perhaps the "magic obsidian arrowhead" is what I've been looking for?

__________________
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire"---GKC