[rollei_list] Re: T shutter jam, cont'd

  • From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:16:22 -0700

Sanders,

Don't you get it?! That is why wedding photographers for many years used
square Sanders, they can crop it vertical or horizontal as needed. Or leave
it square if desired. It was an ideal format.

Peter K

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:26 AM, Sanders McNew <sanders@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ordinarily I would agree with you.  But when I am
> shooting a 3/4-length person, the square leaves
> an awful lot of space on either side.
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandersnyc/2494312376/
>
> Of course it is possible to use arms and hands and
> posture to help fill more of  the frame and make the
> person look less like a stick:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandersnyc/2355209130/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandersnyc/2671412044/
>
> In the past my impulse has been to shoot these with
> a 5x7 view camera:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandersnyc/1402145874/
>
> Recently I've moved to the T with the 16-frame mask,
> turned on its side, to shoot them:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandersnyc/3436677435/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandersnyc/3479890438/
>
> Though it sounds awkward, using a T on its side (on
> a tripod, of course) is actually quite easy.  And since
> none of the people I photograph have ever been
> shot with a film camera before, let alone a Rolleiflex,
> they don't find it any weirder than being photographed
> with an upright Rolleiflex -- it's all alien to them.
>
> Sanders
>
>
> Robert Meier wrote:
>

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. rollei_list
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2009