[rollei_list] Re: S2 format
- From: "Marvin Wallace" <Marvin0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 08:11:40 +0800
Well we will have to disagree on that point then, particularly that the
viewer will not know that the image is cropped. Second I don't think its
good to crop photograph's either with the enlarger but especially with the
knife.
I you read my post, I didn't say you SHOULDN'T use more than one camera; I
suggested it is not the best practice and I stick to that sentiment.
That the Rolleiflex was not made for square negs is true, but it's an awful
35mm camera, and proves that there is an inherent limitation with a
particular designs.
Perhaps the strongest line of evidence, is that if you look at a great
photographers, they tend to use 1 maybe 2 cameras, master them and stick to
them, Ansel Adams, Cartier Bresson etc.
Granted modern artists are a little more eclectic, but the classic
photographers, stuck to this idea.
Marvin
_____
From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gene Johnsonthe
viewer
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:57 AM
To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: S2 format
The Rolleiflex TLR was not made square to force us to take square pictures.
There is nothing wrong with cropping photographs either with an enlarger or
a blade. The eye of the viewer can only see the finished product. And there
is nothing wrong with using more than one camera. Even for fine art.
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 4:43 PM, Marvin Wallace <Marvin0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
For one with an experienced eye it is quite easy to spot a body of work on
display, which is done with different cameras, as the subtle aspects of the
photographs which bind the collection together are not unified. The worst
thing to do in my opinion is to try to edit the ratio of the photograph's
either with the enlarger of a knife.
If you prefer to work with images one at a time, that's good for you.
I do tend to think in terms of large bodies of photographs and how they will
fit together, but I'm not a commercial photographer I am coming from a fine
art background.
Regards,
Marvin.
_____
From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gene Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:32 AM
To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: S2 format
I try to take each picture one at a time. I had a bunch of stuff on a wall
recently, and I was pleased with myself for having matching frames and
matting. But they were all basically 16x20 cut to either 4:5 or 2:3, and
frankly, it was a little boring. I want to do 20X24 based prints, but I
think I should probably start making 11x14's again too. I will continue to
try to make each picture look as good as I can, regardless of which camera
I'm using, and let the catalog take care of itself
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Marvin Wallace <Marvin0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Marvin Wallace
One of the motivations for getting the "correct" ratio, is that if you
continually change cameras (like me), you end up with a catalogue of work
that doesn't fit together very well. You perhaps will have beautiful 6 X 6
portraits and then 2.4 x 3.6 portraits done with a nice lens such as a
summicron 90.
Though I have been unable to live up to my own ideal, it is good to use as
few cameras as possible, so I would argue against the many ratio's are good
hypothesis.
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
--
Be Just and Fear Not
--
Be Just and Fear Not
Other related posts:
