iván

What a composition, David !

Thanks.

-Iván

Thanks, Mr. Buffamanti. Your educated answer tought me very effectively whose name to skip in the site so as to make a more effective use of my time.

Best regards.

-Iván

Hi, Panya:

IMHO you need no critique: yours is some of the best B&W photography I've seen lately. I envy the wide tonal range, the natural "easy" composition, exact framing and the careful and neat printing as far as can be appraised on screen.

Thanks for your contribution. Something to have at hand like a good reference horizon for one's own work.

Regards, Panya

-Iván

Hi, Heather:

I like Nbr.2. I assume you planned it to be the way it is. And even if you didn't I like it all the same: simple but graphically meaningful; in sumary more than I can get in far too many occassions.

Congrats !

-Iván

Chris:

If you like and enjoy using film cameras, you don't need any more reasons to buy yet another one if you want/can.

If you don't like and enjoy them, you don't need a reason either.

In both cases, I'd suggest that we couldn't supply you with any particular reason for you to do what you want, right?

Enjoy your camera, Chris, whether digital or film . . .

Regards !

-Iván

After a long time without posting anything but not always away from the Forum I found these new rules and couldn't help but agree with Lutz's opinion: promoting (longer life time allowed, perhaps) more intellectually or graphically interesting postings could well be more productive than prohibiting more and more contributions (most possible exception: film vs. digital, of course). In particular, I'd like to highlight Lutz's proposed objective: to obtain as many threads and postings worth to be permanently kept as possible, i.e to stick to the same criterium we use when making photographs. A grading system would certainly point in that direction but will surely invite countless opinions on the unfairness of the grading system itself. If it is true that most of us must be careful about the usage of our limited free time and too many postings are of no help regarding this goal it is also true that we will always be free to read only what we want and skip the non interesting contributions, each of us at our own will. And I feel sad to say that IMHO the average interest of our contributions has noticeably decreased from the Greenspun times.

I'm presently trying to make arrangemets here to go back into activity in the Forum but in the mean time I'd like to thank for this opportunity with or without the rules.

Best regards friends !

-Iván

Travis:

Interesting discusion above but I'd rather refer to my own limited experience for wathever it could be worth: what happens is that your camera doesn't have any brains. It just reproduces whatever you put in front of it in the exact technical conditions you commanded. On the other end you are looking not only through the viewfinder but through your entire emotional and cultural background so that often what you see is not exactly what you look upon but a meaning that could be more or less loosely related with the graphic content in the viewfinder, which is the only result you will get from your camera . . . even if it happens to be a Leica. But sometimes you are lucky enough to squeeze into your viewfinder right the graphic elements which will actually convey the meaning you had in mind. And that makes the day for me ! !

Regards, Travis. My 2 cents.

-Iván

Hi, Bill:

Yours IS a very good photo, IMHO.

But I'd like to follow Ralph's observation: it could well be that an image showing your subject at a different fraction of a second earlier/later could have caught the critical moment when a given movement is just to be completed and makes you complete it in your mind making you feel the movement implied in your photo as in real life. Of course the classical example is HC-B's photo of the guy jumping over the pond.

I'm constantly trying to catch decisive moments though with few success: when I do get the sense of movement, the overall graphic quality of the photo seldom is satisfactory. I assume that to consistently get both things together you actually have to be HC-B himself . . . but I continue trying. Who knows, some day . . .?

-Iván

Hi, Chris:

Though THE portrait lens is usually said to be either 90mm or 105mm, I have found that you can handle this difficult job even with a 50mm Cron. Usually with less reluctance on the part of the subject than with longer lenses.

And the old 50mm Cron doesn't stress skin details to the point newer lenses do, I think

Regards !

-Iván<div></div>

Hi, Travis:

Lutz' advise is sound to me and when even after trying Lutz' advises I'm not really happy with the background I just don't shoot and add the situation to my mental hardrive so that in future situations I can take advantage of the just learned item. I just don't see the point in taking a picture that I know beforehand that I won't be happy with later on.

Only exceptions: situations when even the worst background can't detract from the main documentary or anecdotical interest. Seldom happens in front of my camera. . .

My 2 cents. Regards !

-Iván<div></div>

Yes, of course: JAY ! ! !

- Iván

Trying to stay OT ;-}

(2)The look (3)Extreme low light handheld

Regards !

-Iván

Good game, Travis. You are keeping us very busy lately . . .!

-Iván<div></div>

Good thread, Travis !

My two cents . . .

-Iván<div></div>

Hi, Roberto !

It's been a long time without any news from your part so that this one is a particularly good new. My own dark room is at my office so I need a bedroom for long photo work sesions but I'll have to wait until being able to afford a new larger house. Though your solution looks better since nobody will interrupt you saying it's too late to continue working.

Anyhow, I feel happy you are back and will wait for your photo news!

Regards

-Iván

Joe Kallo's case happens to be my own. I still have some sadly missed shots in my memory which happened to be the last one in the roll and were spoiled beyond remedy.

-Iván

Ooops ! I hadn't seen the scratches until now. Basic Murphy at work.

-Iván

Eyes ? FWIW: Ilford XP2s shot at ASA 250, developed at a 1-hour lab and hand printed. Shot at 1/30s, f2.8, hand held. M3 SS, old 90mm Elmar plus Visoflex. Scanned on a table top scanner (UMAX Astra 600S) and cleaned up with Polaroid DSR.

Regards !

-Iván<div></div>

Don't give up so easily, you chicken !

Main suggestion: KISS

Other suggestions:

Set a 6 months horizon with a theme assigned to each month. You could post a long list of potential themes so that a short list (6 themes)could be voted by the forumers.

Select the themes so that they are colour independent: "flowers" can also be photographed in B&W; "Blue" can't.

I for one am with you on this. Get sure that Tony and Co. are too . . .

Best regards. Just do it ! (Tony permits . . .)

-Iván

Maybe photographers who shoot for long enough end up having a distinct way to do it; mainly a way to look around and identify the kind of subjects they prefer and the way they want to record a particular happenstance of time and light, in some cases; a way to arrange objects / persons in front of their camera to show them the way they want us to see them, in other cases.

I don't think that the quality (?) of a photographer defines whether she/he has her/his own style: one could theoretically make very bad photos patterned so that a personal "style" could be identified like one's own.

Regarding style recognition I think that an easier example could be related to painting and traditional fine and representative arts in general: we can easily recognize Picasso's, Goya's, Rodin's, Modigliani's, De Chirico's, Bach's, Arrau's styles, right? The same as H C-B's, Gibson's, etc. And that is exactly what some people use in order to fake master pieces ! so that it is very obvious that style does exist and can be recognized, more or less easily depending upon how different it was from the main stream production or upon how repetitive its defining details are in the artist's work. Even more, if somebody else works in a similar form we usually say she/he works "the master's style"

A different thing is to assume that one can purposely produce art work in a given style (assuming that one can produce ART work, in the first place). IMHO style is a consequence of many subtle personal factors more than of an organized way of doing things. No doubt that it could arise from a given organized way of doing things, however. Provided there is more to it than just a work mechanics . . .

Leica having any impact on one's style? The concept seems to be subtle enough as for not being tied to any brand, be it of cameras, paintbrushes, or other tools. And then, style is about a person, isn't it? I assume that in the old times Leica could have contributed to make possible the development of some personal styles because it made spontaneity more possible than most older photo gear, of course. But I doubt that the same could be reasonably be sustained today. Specially if one thinks that there are far more Leica independent photo styles possible to be readily recognized than "Leica styles", if any.

Of course this a very controversial issue, but as useful as any other one and better than many if you want to talk about "philosophical" subjects . . . and far more interesting than gear-only topics, IMHO.

Regards, Christoph !

-Iván

Impresive. Cool and cold ! Well attained technical effort.

IMHO the borders don't help: way too Baroque for the subject . .

Regards, Johann. Post your improvements on this subject; not easy task !

-Iván

. . . "Am I missing something about Houston?"

Yes, of course !

I'm sure that what you find so interesting in Guatemala is the same as uninteresting for the locals as Houston is for you. And I'm sure for one simple reason: I was to Houston years ago and made interesting photos all over the place. Unfortunately I don't own a scanner able to process slides which was what I used to shoot at that time, so I can't support my words with graphical evidence in this opportunity :-(

To your main question: 1 to 2 rolls a week, normally. 1 to 2 rolls a day when on vacation. The real problem is the dark room, but I enjoy that problem.

Regards, Steve. Be a "Guatemalteco" once back in Houston.

-Iván

" . . . I also find that when I am in a foreign place, my senses are totally awake to things that I�m sure must be bland to the locals. "

Couldn't have been stated more clearly, I.M.H.O

Be a permanent foreigner at your very home place. It will improve your life quality besides your photography. It has improved both for me. . . though we don't even have a zoo here ;-)

Best of luck !

-Iván

This posting was inspired by Budi Darmawan Prawirasumantri's previous

one. The subject can lead (and has led) to much arguing so I prefer

not to make a verbal statement but a graphical one, as usual.

Thanks for the inspiration, friend!

All and every comments welcome, of course.

Best regards !

-Iván<div></div>

Tipical mid afternoon here (Concepción, Chile) these days.

Regards !

-Iván<div></div>