Some more photographs by Al Kaplan

Stephen, I agree. I think that people on the Forum would get along much better in person. I met Al before I knew a lot about him on the Forum, otherwise I might be taking pot shots at his dusty scans or coughing at the smoke around the pics others have taken of him. Instead, I have a wealth of friendship and excellent prints from a truly first-rate photographer and humman being. And Brad has some great shots too. He's a very talented photographer. I think of this: I don't remember the last morning I woke up and looked at a photograph hanging on my wall and said, "I did not dust you today." Photographs are behind that and stand up to any residue that slightly mars their presence--especially on a computer monitor. That ain't what it's about. Al is a classy guy and a terrific photographer. That's what matters.

I guess that I was agreeing with Andy...

I think we need Dr. Phil around here.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BgKW

 

This thread has some really bad scans, not sharp, totally blown highlights and murky inky featureless shadows, way too much contrast. Well, at least there's no "smokey" artifacts, but them my monitor might just not be picking them up. Be a mensch and help this guy. Thanks! ~Al

Well, Al, you got me...

 

It is definitely not up to the same level of interest and excellence of that public persona

press photo shot you got of John Anderson speaking behind a lectern - that any

competent photographer intern working in a rural town newspaper would have snapped

with the rest of the press corp. I know you must have some more non-press shots of him,

before or after his speech that are more casual, personal, and interesting? Please share!

Nice picture at the top of the page - the best I've seen from Al so far. The press work is no more than competent, but this personal image is far more interesting. It would be nice to see more of this sort of thing.

Jeff taking a picture of Brad taking a picture of Jeff's picture.

 

LOL

Johnathan,<br><br>

 

 

<i> Eric, sometimes you have to look at how a dispute began before deciding who's right and who's wrong. </i><br><br>

 

I wasn't deciding or taking any sides in this issue. My rant was in regards to my general feelings on how this place has deteriorated over the last two years. <br><br>

<i> Four or five people regularly pile on Al every time he appears on Photo.net, yet you accuse me of becoming meaner and braver behind a keyboard when I come out of the woodwork to defend him. </i><br><br>

Again, I wasn't taking sides. Just tired of seeing this crap. Brad made a simple observation and people pounced. I'm not sure what you are defending, but merely pointed out your tact as you have reverted to insults and inaccurate generalizations. <br><br>

<i> Al makes it no secret that he has gotten much of his equipment for a song at estate sales, and many of the posts here are complaints about the price of new Leica equipment, yet you try to position Leica users as some sort of elitist group. </i><br><br>

Not sure of the reference to Al here or what it has to do with your disgust of a certain amount of photographers that you've mentioned and left to enjoy each others company over on another forum. <br><br>

<i> The name of the forum is Leica Photography, yet you seem to feel that there is something wrong with participants being more enthusiastic about Leica equipment than other brands or other ways of making pictures. </i><br><br>

You're making things up. <br><br>

<i> I really don't understand where you're coming from. I'm not trying to be cute here. If you're trying to take the high ground, why aren't you defending Al against attacks, instead of attacking those who defend him? Why deny Leica enthusiasts the simple pleasure of "talking shop"?</i> <br><br>

Again, I'm taking sides in this issue. I've never attacked Al and ignored, for the most part, his inaccuracies in regards to digital and todays modern cameras. My post was in response to your dribble. That's why I cited it before my response.<br><br>

<i> If you really think that the photographers here are "below average," why not make some helpful suggestions? </i><br><br>

I guess you don't pay attention to my posts. I've helped many here with tech info in regards to film and dev procedures. <br><br>

<i> And please, before you answer -- if you choose to answer -- think about how it all started, and not about just trying to get the next shot in. </i><br><br>

The next shot in? hmm...so much for adults being found here. <br><br>

Well, Eric, I understand your point of view and, I hope, you understand mine.

 

I hope we meet again under more pleasant circumstances in another thread.

 

It's sunny in New York today, and I'll be out taking pictures.

<i>This thread has some really bad scans, not sharp, totally blown highlights and murky inky featureless shadows, way too much contrast</i><p>

 

That thread has no scans. Maybe it would be better to know what things are before criticizing them...<p>

 

But thanks for the free publicity!

<i> I also appreciated the links you sent to those stunning portfolios of your photos of gorgeous girls</i><p>

 

Where? I'm looking but don't see any in Brad's portfolios.

Bill and Michael B, where are your photos? You are <I> photographers</I>, right?

I don't know you Al. But I do like your pics, they bring back a lot of memories of the times, shame you couldn't have made a couple bucks off of them. ;-]

Brad, we're still waiting to see your great photographs. 3,500 postings and not one photo??? And BTW what model Leica do you prefer?

Owl Ink: I've probably posted at least a thousand pix here over the last couple of years.

Says something if you can't find even one.<P>

 

Anyway, <a href= "http://pages.sbcglobal.net/b-evans/Images11/SFWeb%203-20

-05/">here</a> are some snaps from two Fridays ago in SF. Now let's see some of yours.

"competent photographers with similar styles who share some sort of collective fantasy that they comprise an elite corps of cutting edge shooters."

 

That's crap, Dennis. I'm surprised to see you stoop so low. Who on the Street/Doc forum claims to be an "elite" photographer? As if anyone actually would.

Brad: Sorry, but I never heard of you before. I clicked on your name which took me to your page here on PN, but as you have no photos there now, I have nothing to judge your comments by. Since your link is not to PN, I believe my comment stands as valid. I just want to see some of your work with a Leica since you are on the Leica forum. The link you were kind enough to provide doesn't say what kind of camera(s) you use, but evidently you manipulate your images heavily with PS. Nothing wrong with that in and of itself, but it doesn't give me an idea of what you're capable of without a computer. I'm trying to get a handle on this discussion, not attack you personally. If you click on my name you will be taken to my page here on PN and you can click on some of my photos that are listed there. BTW, I haven't posted anything with a Leica there yet, but I have four of the beasts from Wetzlar; an M3, a Leicaflex, Leicaflex SL, and a Leica IIIF (not that I like to brag, I just want to verify that I feel that qualifies me to be in the Leica Forum.) I have learned a lot here, as there are many old pros in this group who have forgotten more than you or I will ever learn. Mostly I just read and learn and don't comment unless I feel I can add something positive to the discussion. "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt".

<i>Since your link is not to PN, </i><p>

 

Photo.net provides an interface that many photographers don't like - it's terrible to showcase your work to outside photographers. Note that Al Kaplan doesn't have any posted in the photo.net galleries either, but I don't see you complaining about that, do I?<p>

 

It's simple enough to click on Brad's name and look for threads that begin with "NW", but that seems to be beyond your capacity, so maybe you should just call it a day and find someone else to harass. Like Al, click on his name and you won't find any photos either.<p>

 

<i>Nothing wrong with that in and of itself, but it doesn't give me an idea of what you're capable of without a computer.</i><P>

 

You ask people who scan their prints what they could do without a darkroom? You asked Al for scans that didn't use a darkroom? I haven't seen you ask that question, what's up with that? Some sort of elitist double standard? Hmmm....<p>

 

<i> "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt".</i><p>

 

Given your comments here, great advice. Take it.

>Photo.net provides an interface that many photographers don't like -

Then why do they post here? And why don't they like it? Please share your wisdom. Contribute something positive, if you can.

>it's terrible to showcase your work to outside photographers.

Again, WHY? Because they are capable of actually critiquing a photo instead of fawning over one another?

>Note that Al Kaplan doesn't have any posted in the photo.net >galleries either, but I don't see you complaining about that, do I?

Why should I? His work is visible here, he has scanned and posted it on this thread, something I accurately pointed out that your friend failed to do. Mr K has demonstrated his abilities. I've seen his photos of Bob Dylan, Janis Joplin, Joan Baez, Greatful Dead, etc., etc. I was asking to see some of examples of Brad's work. Why do you seem to have a problem with that?

>It's simple enough to click on Brad's name and look for threads that >begin with "NW", but that seems to be beyond your capacity,

You presume to know what my capacities are, please be good enough to share your insights with us lowly mortals. I said I was trying to get a handle on this discussion and understand what was going on in order to hopefully contribute something or maybe mediate what seems to be just a common "bitch" session, not make vain, childish attacks like you are doing.

>so maybe you should just call it a day and find someone else to >harass.

Whom am I harassing? I was asking for information to make an informed decision. Instead I get a ration of bull from someone who I wasn't even speaking to. I do not appreciate false accusations and rest assured I will report your harassment to PN's monitors.

>Like Al, click on his name and you won't find any photos either.

Any idiot can see his photos here in this thread.

 

>You ask people who scan their prints what they could do without a >darkroom?

No, I didn't. Reread my post.

>You asked Al for scans that didn't use a darkroom?

Where did I do that? You are making false accusations again.

>I haven't seen you ask that question,

At least that's one thing you got right. You didn't see it because I didn't ask it.

>what's up with that? Some sort of elitist double standard? Hmmm....

Elitist? You are the one who is pontificating here, not I. You are comparing apples with oranges, making a "straw man" argument to knock down later. Pathetic. Working with film is entirely different than working with digital.

 

 

>"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open your mouth >and remove all doubt".

 

>Given your comments here, great advice. Take it.

You are the one who is making rude, childish accusations, not I. No one was speaking to or about you. It would appear that Brad and you are more than just friends. Regardless, you have already removed any doubts I may have had about you. (Who are you anyway, and why should I care? Answers: Nobody, and I don't.) It appears to me you are unable to contribute anything to this thread other than your overly inflated ego, your admiration for Brad and your distaste for Al Kaplan and anyone who questions your self-assumed superiority. Maybe you and Brad can start a mutual admiration society where you can both gush over each other. Good luck.

BTW, I never did get an answer to the question I asked about what model Leica(s) does Brad use? Can someone please give a civil answer without being childish, or is that too much to ask?

<i>Because they are capable of actually critiquing a photo instead of fawning over one another? </i><p>

 

I have to say that this comment epitomizes how ridiculous this response is. The rest of the response, complete with its unreadable formatting, continues in this vein.<p>

 

As to who I am, exhibiting, published, etc etc. A photographer.

Dudes engage in social intercourse with a little guy called grunt over in the street forum. They are all are rather fond of each other. They usually join together to bad mouth other photographers.

"No one was speaking to or about you."

 

will you take your own words and drop out of this thread too, Owl? For a guy that doesn't even know that Brad posts tons of pics, your opinions aren't qualified here.

> Brad posts <b>tons</b> of pics

<br><br>

can you judge images by their weight?

yours are pretty heavy Brad...