W. Eugene Smith and the Leica, in 1952

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

<p>Latest American Photo (Mar/Apr 2010, USA) has an interesting article on W. Eugene Smith. It's about his photographing on the set of Charles Chaplin's "Limelight" movie in 1952. Anyway, I thought it might be of interest.</p>

<p><em>I used six Leicas as my basic equipment, with different focal-length lenses so that when held to one spot, I could reach out various distances for my photograph or secure different perspectives. One with 28mm extreme-wide-angle, two with 35mm wide-angle (the camera I used most frequently and almost exclusviely in "Spanish Village"--the second camera beingt used so that I would not be caught without film at a crucial moment--later I loaded this second camera with an extremely high-speed film to use when the light was impossible for anything else); one with 50mm f1.5 the so-called normal lens; an 85mm f2; and a 135mm f3.5. Besides these I used a Foton rapid sequence camer for two days, for such performance numbers as the somersault and split. A 4x5 view camera for two overall production shots of the set. I made a couple of unimportant pictures with a Rolleiflex. However, 90 percent of my usual coverage is done with the Leica with the 35mm f2.8 wide-angle lens.</em></p>

<p>I found it of interest that he kept two Leicas with 35mm lenses so that if he ran out of film he'd have the other. Makes sense to me.</p>

 

[andrea_taurisano]

<p><em>"One with 28mm extreme-wide-angle"</em><br>

<br /> <em>I wonder what he'd have called a CV 12mm ;-)<br /> </em></p>

[john_elder1]

<p>I believe he was the best photojournalist of the last century. Check out the recent book" The Jazz Loft Project", "Dreamstreet", "Minamata", and " Let Truth be the Prejudice" There was no compromise in Gene Smith, a perfectionist to the last breath. When I got my copy of " The Jazz Loft Project" I actually read the entire book within 24 hours of receiving it. I very rarely read photo monographs, just study the photos. The writing as well as the photographs are fantastic!</p>

[knut_schwinzer]

<p>Thanks for the recommendation, John!<br>

Wow! 6 screwmount-Leicas! With all their loading quirks, VFs for everything else than 50mm, it is easy to understand that he brought 6 of them.<br>

Interestingly he is "mocking" about the "normal" designation of the 50mm.<br>

But why? Because he refers to the extraordinary speed (don't think so), or because a "normal" lens for him is a rather a 35mm on 24x36 (like for many of us)? <br>

The Leica 35mm f2.8 lens- FWIK, it was introduced in 1958...So maybe he was working back then with the LTM 3.5 Summaron with its (from today's view) a little awkward ergonomics.<br>

When 28mm was considered "an extreme WA", produced until 1955 as Hektor with maximum aperture of 6.3, and from then on until 1963 as Summaron with 5.6, then it comes to think what meant "extremely high speed film"...maybe 200 ASA, 400?<br>

What technical challenge!<br>

And yet, beautiful pictures. For me, that puts things into perspective. </p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>Smith was a major influence on me. After viewing the Minamata series as a young man, I was so moved, I knew at that exact moment I was going to be a photograher the rest of my life. Years later, as a working pro for the Getty museum, I was in the print storage area looking at some Penn prints, when I opened a drawer and there, unexpectedly, was Smith's original print of Tomoko Uemura in Her Bath. Alone in the quiet of the dimly lit room, tears welled in my eyes as the solemn beauty of that picture washed over me as it had so many years before. Thanks for this post.</p>

[dstate1]

<p>Smith primarily used Leica camera bodies with Canon lenses in the 50's. He was one of the early adopters of Japanese optics along with David Douglas Duncan.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>The 85/2 and 135/3.5 are almost certainly Canon Serenar lenses. The 50/1.5 could be as well, although the Summarit was also a 50/1.5. But the Serenar 50/1.5 Sonnar-clone would be technically superior to the Summarit...<br>

If he was using the Canon 28/3.5, the case says "super wide" on it.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Having an LTM Leica, I can understand his use of several bodies, given the need for separate viewfinders and the film charging hassle with an LTM. It is interesting to imagine what he would do with an M Leica and its multiframe finder, or with a digital Leica or other modern RF camera. I appreciate not only his artistic sense, but also his ability to get so much out of a Barnack Leica, without benefit of metering and integrated focussing and viewing. Hats off!</p>

<p>Yes, the Japanese lenses had a short period of superiority over older formula glasses without rare earth compositions in the 50s, until Leica caught up.</p>

[Troll]

<p>It was Horace Bristol (another great now-forgotten photographer) who "discovered" the quality of Nikkor lenses while covering the "Korean Conflict," and introduced them to DDD.<br>

In his photoessay on Dr Albert Switzer, Smith used the fabulous Zeiss f:4.5/21mm Biotar on his Leica.<br>

Jim Hughes unflinching biography of Smith, "<em>Shadow and Substance</em>," alternately gives one goosebumps out of pride and shame at Smith's work and his life. Probably one of the half-dozen best books ever writen about an artist.</p>

[russ_britt3]

<p>I have a personal friend that has been operating out of the same portrait studio in downtown Wilson NC from 1948 till now.<br>

He was a photographer in the Navy with Eugene Smith, he said Eugene still owes him $50..... I found that out one day by bring Mr Smiths name up while talking to him, he just said (Do you know him too?)....I said you do? He said yep we served together in the navy, they used the same darkroom on board. He did not seem to be any more impressed by Eugene than just another WWII buddy....<br>

he told me about standing up in a fighter plane to photograph islands before the troops landed to figure out landing spots. Having to jump out darkroom into the ocean because of attack, and watching the ship sail off without him. Then being picked up by the next ship in line......a really crazy time I guess.<br>

But he in in his 80s and still shooting......and does pretty good too....sure knows a lot.<br>

Well kinda off topic, but yes I really like Eugene's work too.</p>

 

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>I should have kept all my Barnack Leicas, tuned or not. Damn. Not that I'd use them much but I love those things. Anyway, I agree that if there is such as thing as 'best' PJ of the 20thC, and I am not a fan of lists, it's Smith (as much as I like Capa and HCB etc.).</p>

[ron_breeze2]

<p><em>"One with 28mm extreme-wide-angle"</em><br /><br /><em>I wonder what he'd have called a CV 12mm ;-)</em><br>

<em><strong>What it's called today an ultra wide.:-})</strong></em></p>

[bds1]

<p>Thats odd I've just been going through Horace Bristol's archive with corbis, fantastic stuff although most of it seemed to be 2 1/4 (I'm guessing rolleiflex) He deserves to be far better known</p>

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

<p>'Went to my bookcase and pulled out <em>Dream Street W. Eugene Smith's Pittsburgh Project</em>, edited by Sam Stephenson. This is really worth a look (as mentioned above) if you're interested in Smith's work. It's been nearly 50 years since he made those photographs and they're certainly "fresh" today. BTW, I also--as a result of this thread--ordered the Jim Hughes biography on WES.<br>

I appreciate all the contributions to this thread--thanks all!</p>

[Troll]

<p>Smith's biggest project was probably a survey of Pittsburg, a small assignment which got completely out of hand. Only a few of the many thousands pictures were published, but it developed a mythical reputation as the ultimate in mid-twentieth century photojournalism to rival Robert Frank's "<em>America</em>."<br>

It was finally published a couple of years ago in book format (highly edited, of course, which any project that big has to be), and I found it to be strangly disappointing in the superficial quality of his work, as well as the layout.<br>

I look forward to seeing "<em>The Jazz Loft Project,</em>" which I hadn't known was available before the comment above. Thanks.</p>

[furcafe]

<p>Interesting bit of background info. Didn't realize he used a Bell & Howell Foton.</p>

[graham_line]

The theme in the Hughes biography (and that of many, many other photographers) is that he used what was available to him at the time, and which best suited his needs. At the time of the Minimata project, much of his backing was coming from Minolta.

[kbg32]

<p>Eugene Smith gave a presentation on his work at the first college I attended back in 1975. He had just finished Minamata. I'll never forget it. </p>

[red_buckner]

<p>When I was three years old, I came across Smith's essay "Country Doctor" in <strong>Life</strong>. I was small enough to be in an almost pre-verbal world. Those pictures nailed me as nothing visual ever had. I was hypnotized by the feeling in them. I was especially fascinated by the picture of the doctor slumped against a stove with a cup of coffee. He looked so tired he was almost defeated. I had never seen an adult look that way. <br>

For thirty years after, I didn't know who had taken the shots. When I started studying photography, I found out and was able to locate the shots. They knocked me down all over again. It speaks of Smith's power that a very small child could be drawn so deeply into his art. </p>