Thoughts concerning Edward Weston, "magic bullets" and saxophones

[Blacky Dalton]

Kevin,

I absolutely agree that when it comes to guitars it is more obvious, but I was carrying on the analogy of the saxophone. I worked in the music business way back when I was a very young man and I swear I can’t remember any brand names of saxophones. Must be old age?

I feel you should own the best tools you can afford. And your tools should, as mentioned previously, fit your hand. When it comes to photography, certainly film and lenses influence the finished print, but the brand name on the camera has little to do with the image, especially when you are talking LF or ULF. I would still challenge anyone to look at any print and tell me what brand was on the nameplate of the camera.

I see so much discussion about camera brand. Everyone has their preference. What would happen if you ask what brand car you should buy in a crowded bar? I have been in some places where it wouldn’t be long before physical altercation would begin.

Years ago when I bought a new 35mm camera system, I made my final choice by holding each camera in my hand. One particular brand fit my had the best and that is the one I purchased.

Jim,

I can still play that radio also!

Your post is most relevant to my position. Now take the five prints you mentioned as each being “astonishingly different” and place them on the wall. Show them to some number of people. Then ask those people to identify which lens made each photo.

Interesting discussion,

B. Dalton

[Randy H]

And your tools should, as mentioned previously, fit your hand.

One particular brand fit my had the best and that is the one I purchased.

Jim,
Your post is most relevant to my position. Now take the five prints you mentioned as each being “astonishingly different” and place them on the wall. Show them to some number of people. Then ask those people to identify which lens made each photo.

1) Agree. Tool should have a comfortable fit and feel.
2) ibid
3) Beg to differ. While they may not be able to identify camera, there are those that would be able to identify lens. Each type and maker will tend to have its own "personality" that is inherently unique, in and of itself.

Just as some people prefer Chevy and some prefer Olds or Pontiac. All three being made by the same company, each has its own unique personality designed to attract a certain group of drivers. Same with cameras and lenses. They all take pictures, but each has its own feel and style.

[Vaughn]

...SNIP...The qualities of a camera (large format in particular) don't imprint themselves on the final outcome quite as readily. The cameras personality manifests itself more with how easily and efficiently the operator can use it.

Lenses and film have more of a signature to them than does the camera.

Format of the camera also plays an important role in determining the image...going from the square of the 6x6cm, to the rectangles and the panoramic formats.

Vaughn

[Blacky Dalton]

Not trying to start a war, but just trying to make the point that in photography the most important thing is the finished image. It is not about the process nor the hardware, it is the finished photo that really counts. As mentioned earlier two musicians can play the same instrument, but they can sound very different.

What is important for any artist using the medium of photography is to be able to create the finished product that says what you feel. It is up to you, the photographer/craftsman to choose the tools that allow you to express your feeling in the finished print. Those tools are of little interest to someone that is just a patron of the art itself. Those that buy paintings have no interest in what brand of brush or canvas was used.

We are a society that is constantly pounded by advertisers to be mindful of product manufacturers. Brand recognition is pounded at all of us every day, and I sometimes think we spend way too much time looking at the brand and not the finished product.

Just a few observations. And Jim I am jamming with that radio right now!

B. Dalton

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Not trying to start a war, but just trying to make the point that in photography the most important thing is the finished image. It is not about the process nor the hardware

Many of us disagree with you, the process and to a certain extent the hardware play an important part in the finished photograph, without them, and specially the process the finish photograph would not look the same.

If you hate using your hardware, then chances are making a photograph would feel like work rather than an enjoyable pursuit.

[Blacky Dalton]

Exactly Jorge, the artistically creative process is mainly a right brain function. The operation of the equipment is a left brain function. The two do not live well together at the same time. So, if your artistic functioning is continually interrupted by the left brain function trying to operate some contraption that does not work well for you, it is easy to become frustrated and just say to heck with it all.

By saying “It is not about the process nor the hardware” I mean that you should first find the processes and hardware that suits you, so that these things are no longer distractions to your right brain processes. Owning the finest equipment you can afford is not necessarily about the money, but is about what fits your hand.

Exactly as you said Jorge, “If you hate using your hardware, then chances are making a photograph would feel like work rather than an enjoyable pursuit.”. . . if the equipment is that much of a distraction, why bother. EW was an exception to this, even though he had a badly worn camera, leaky bellows and a less than optimum lens, he was driven to grit his teeth and just grin and bear it. Obviously he found a way to not allow the left brain distractions to affect him????

B. Dalton

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

EW was an exception to this, even though he had a badly worn camera, leaky bellows and a less than optimum lens, he was driven to grit his teeth and just grin and bear it. Obviously he found a way to not allow the left brain distractions to affect him????

Was he really an exception, or just a very talented photographer? I think most of us have at one time or another used cameras and equipment that was less than optimal and still managed to get some good shots.

IN the end I do agree with you that if you manage to get the craft end of photography ,in other words, the technical crap out of the way, you are then ready to beguin expressing yourself through your medium.

[Blacky Dalton]

I think it was Brooks Jensen in one of his podcasts where he tells the story of someone he knew that spent years honing his photographic skills. This person amassed the equipment and techniques required to make beautifully crafted prints. Then some years later when Books contacted this person he found that he had sold all of his equipment and dismantled is large darkroom. Seems that for this fellow, once he had mastered the process, he found he had nothing to say. Strange story?

As far as EW, an exception is not a good description. He was extremely talented and because of his extremely narrowly focused talent he was driven. He didn’t really care about the equipment. It was just the means to an end. He just plowed through the difficulties because he was driven to make the image. Again, the finished photograph. I truly wonder what it would be like to be able to focus at that intensity?

B. Dalton

[John Kasaian]

BALONEY.

Take it from a guy who plays a mean radio.

Last evening I made 5 shots of a single black-eyed-susan with 5 different ecclectic lenses and the results are astonishingly different from each other. Each one pleases me! There isn't a winner or loser in the bunch, they're just different. None of 'em look like they were made with an ordinary plasmat. I'll post 'em in a bit.

Jim,
You can certainly give credit to your optics, but c'mon---you take some really fine photographs with those funky old lenses. Someone who dosen't have your artistic eye for photography could take photos with equally funky old lenses and the results might well be anything but astonishing.

Most beginning music students spend a lot of time with Rubanks Method books---dull and boring stuff but it is valuable for learing a lot of fine points---the stuff that seperates the amatuer from the pro.

Most of use could quickly learn to give a shot, stitch a laceration, splint a fracture or even amputate a limb, but who'd want to vsit a "doctor" with only rudimentary skills?

Art students I've been told spend hours in museums sketching away at old paintings, not to learn how to make fogeries but rather to learn the techniques used by the masters.

Worn photo gear is always an issue--especially when starting out. I can't see anything good comoing out of a camera with leaky bellows or that can't lock down. Such will only needlessly frustrate a student but a pro at least knows what is going on and can make the determination that it is his equipment---new people don't yet have that ability (usually.) But I think a good photograph still depends ore on the photographer than the gear.

In a autumn of 84 I was recovering from eye surgery and in the winter of 84 I was ordered to temporary active duty in the reserves so I wasn't able to ski until I was mustered out in the spring. It so happened that there was a summer ski racing camp in Switzerland and while not a racer, I went along just for the fun of it. One of our coaches was a swell guy who didn't make it to the Swiss national team. He kept a rusty old pair of skis stashed behind the timing hut. The campers OTOH were mainly New Englands from a private school in Vermont who all had aspirations to make the US national team. The were young, fit and had the latest racing gear. Our swiss coach was much older and had a love for sausages and beer.

Our coach could ski circles around any of the campers and he set the pace on the race course. In two weeks not a single camper ever came close to this guy's times (My times OTOH, were said to need a calender rather than a chronograph!)
It was great fun, but it taught me that knowlege would beat out equipment---at least in ski racing, certainly in music (one of the signatures on the sax website is "You can play a shoelace if you're sincere enough" attributed to John Coultrane) Maybe in photography, too?

BTW I'm going back to playing the radio one day---if I can ever find the short that keeps blowing the fuse in that old ex-forestry truck of mine! Darn those marmots!

[Jim Galli]

John, you're a wonderful sport. I agree totally about the newbie thing. I always reccomend a late copal shutter and something very forgiving like a Symmar 210. Starting out with at least those 2 areas covered narrows down the problem solving.