Jump to content

I'm all Eyes- Let's see how Lens Signature affects Photographs


ray .

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 318
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

A few clarifications:

 

"Does Marc need the best of the best to shoot weddings? Of course not because the

market doesn't demand such high quality when it comes to weddings. By a wide margin,

the money shots in weddings are the setup ones."

 

Dave, since I don't market my weddings conventionally, nor do I sell hardly any set-up

shots, and a high % of my clients are artists, writers, art directors, designers and

illustrators with extremely high quality expectations ... you are incorrect on every point.

You may well be correct in the generalization that I do not represent the majority of the

professional wedding market ... which is in decline at the lower and middle levels due to

digital "consumerzation".

 

"Douglas on the other hand knows what he needs to get a certain image, and has stuck

with that for a long time."

 

Absolutely true and accurate ... for Doug who specializes in wildlife work. I'm more

diversified... shoot weddings with a Canon digital system for color, and a M system for

B&W. If you knew anything at all about that business you'd know it is essential to have at

least 2 of everything.

 

Also shoot commercial work for national accounts which require MF digital capture

( updated Hassey system which I've used for 20 years)... or a view camera for tilts and

shifts. Not my requirements, but the requirements of the jobs at hand.

 

You and others seem to me to have a myopic view of the vast diversity under the umbrella

called photography ... where some specialize and others diversify.<div>00EMje-26749884.thumb.jpg.6a72dc7a66e0180277cba0d7f35730a0.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete, your perspective that must come from looking up at us, is spot on. Sounds exactly like one of my photo teachers, a great commercial photographer. He'd big on process and finding the photo and then taking a photo from being a good photo to making it a great photo. (BTW,I'm open to any advice along the way). There's still great photos to be made in walking around, if you can see them and have the skill to get what you want in a reletively uncontrolled enviornment. I like Magnum style photography, I also like Avedon, La Chapelle etc.

Regardless, if you don't develope the skills to get what you want, the lens signiture won't matter much now will it. Also believe, and I think Marc demonstrated this well, that it is more at the commercial and fine art level that these lens choices began to come into meaningful play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ray you're a tough nut to crack. Marc and Doug, who have unimpeachable and well deserved respect on this forum, show you differentiations in lens signatures and all you can do is throw the words "well crafted" and "craftsmanship" at them by way of acknowledgement of what they have shown you.

 

Probably way too late to bring this up but I'm gonna try anyway Both our own "Ian", and a fellow named Nigel Nagarajan-who I "met" through this forum, have posted some brilliant, luminous, glowing pictures of people--South Asian people in both cases--taken with Canon EOS equipment. There definitely seems to be--on my screen- a unique "glow" in these pics.

 

Anyone still around who cares to comment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter, many thanks for your truly entertaining and laughable post <i><b>'Peter A; Prolific Poster, nov 30, 2005; 05:51 p.m.'</b></i>. Without question the most amusement I have witnessed in this forum since the Al Kaplan vs Edmo debacle. If it is meant in jest then your sarcasm shines, if you are utterly serious about this then your ignorance bewilders.

<p>

Interestingly you praise Vogue a part of the publishing industry whose <i><b>'tools'</b></i> include Adobe software products for everything from comps and layouts to imaging and produced <i><b>'hacks'</b></I> using Macs and not PC's as you say.

<p>

While yet on the other hand you scoff Magnum who use the likes of Jim Megargee and Brian Young for their analog printing needs.

<p>

Speaking of Young and Megargee it should also be noted that they are the <I><b>'end means'</b></I> in the <I><b>'ttotal workflow'</b></I> for the likes of such <I><b>'fluke artists'</b></I> as Gene Richards, Chris Anderson, Larry Towell, Bruce Davidson, Andrew Gottlieb, Susan Meiselas, James Nacthwey, Eli Reed, Gordon Parks, Clifford Ross, Uimonen Ilkka , David Turnley, Shelby Lee Adams, Leonard Freed, Cornell Capa to name a few.

<p>

<I><b>'stop staring at Magnum site every day and pinning for the nostalgia of the 50's most of you people are so stuck in the past...'</i></b>

<p>

Naturally you must be referring to Majoli, D'Agata, Parke and their contemporaries, all born too late to partake in being <I><b>'stuck in the past'</b></I>.

<p>

Sincerely,<br>

WTF<br>

<p>

ps: As far as what Marc Williams is doing, anyone capable of setting a 28mm lens to f8 and holding the camera in one hand while a flash in the other is capable of producing the same look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<I>Ray you're a tough nut to crack. Marc and Doug, who have unimpeachable...</I><P>

 

Ray has made special note of Doug's photos, several times. Such as:<BR><P>

 

<I>Beauties, Doug. For someone at your level of craftsmanship, I can see how your

equipment choices may make a subtle difference.</I>

www.citysnaps.net
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...