brett_davis1

I give up. Sorry to make you click the link. I can't get it to appear in the thread.

Well, I'll be [FCC-finable word here]. One more try, postage-stamp size:

Grrrr! I can never get these things to fit, and it is less than 511 pixels. Will

shrink it further.

At a park in Maryland, i forget which one. 0-Series, 50mm Anastigmat,

exposure unrecorded, TC400N

Roger, those are terrific. I especially like "pantheo." Reminds me of some very early photographs, like that famous one of the guy getting his boots polished in Paris. Very moody.

And, Rob, I do like the line, "Kodachrome went up to 10." Reminds me that

although I have been shooting seriously since the late 1970s, I have not been

in this game long at all.

I did search, but that threat didn't pop up. But thanks.

I was just wondering if anybody here has a 28 f6.3 Hektor, and can

post pictures from it. I don't know why I want to see them, but it's

such a dinky lens that I am curious. Or if anyone could write an

informed review, that would be of interest to me as well, for some

reason.

 

Thanks in advance,

Brett

It's a brilliant movie; saw it last night at a museum showing in D.C. Sad but uplifting at the same time. One of the kids in the film has an eye for photographs that would put many of us, myself included, to shame. Fingers crossed for an Oscar win!

Thanks all; the slides are moving out of the garage.

Hi, all. I have some slides stored in a fire-proof safe in my garage.

My washer and dryer also live in the garage, and the dryer is not

vented to the outside, but spews its lint into a water basin. This

can make the garage pretty swampy at times. I was wondering whether

this environment would be bad for the film, but it occurred to me

that a fire-proof safe is probably humidity-proof as well, as long as

it's not opened when there's a lot of moisture in the air. Am I

correct in this? Any thoughts? Should I move the safe?

 

Thanks,

Brett

That, and they put a picture of Oskar Barnack on the back! I don't think he would

approve.

The review didn't get me down--it's actually driving people to the show--but I was more interested in getting responses to his opinion that non-juried art shows simply shouldn't exist. I guess part of the problem is there is no certification as to who is an artist and who is not. Of course, Gopnik is working in a field--journalism--with no such certification, either.

I think a D.C. event would be a fine idea. Maybe we should meet at Artomatic.

That's true. And there are others, of course. Actually, I would have spent the cash on

three Al Kaplan T-shirts.

It would probably have gone to food. I live in D.C., I'm not in the habit of paying for

museums! The Smithsonians are free!

Hi, all. I posted a while back about the free-for-all, non-juried show Artomatic 2004

in D.C., which is now up and running (go to www.artomatic.org) for more info. Lots of

photography to see (including mine, but most of that has been posted here).

 

Anyway, the Washington Post's art critic went to the show early and completely ripped

it apart (mentioning "trite street photography" in one blast). He feels, basically, that a

non-juried show is literally an insult to struggling artists, and compares it to amateur

dentists. Since there are amateur photographers, pro photographers, and pro dentists

on this board, I thought it could be helpful to post it and get your thoughts.

 

I have photographed for years, studied it in school and have had photojournalist

shots published in newspapers, but I'm not a professional. Am I insulting anyone by

paying $60 to defray show expenses, volunteering 15 hours, and participating in

Artomatic?

 

And, for the record, the critic is right about one thing: There is a pretty good amount

of crap. But one thing he doesn't mention is that the show is a lot of fun.

 

Here's the review; thanks in advance to anyone who converts this to a live link:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41463-2004Nov10.html?sub=AR

Update: Registration probably won't start Oct. 4 after all. Please just keep checking

the site, updates will be posted there.

For all D.C.-area photographers, artists, dancers, poets, whatever ... you may

remember Artomatic, the sprawling art/performance show that happens every couple

of years. A new one is scheduled to open in November, and registration (I believe)

opens Oct. 4. You have to pay a fee (not sure what) and volunteer 15 hours of time at

the show over a month, and in return you can display whatever you like. Photography

is always a strong part of the show. Please monitor www.artomatic.org for more

details!

Apple since 1989; original 128K ("Fat Mac'ed" for about $1,000 at the time); LC II; PowerPC 7300 w/IBM card (a waste of money on that); now using a G3 266Mhz that I dug out of the trash at work, an original iBook with an upgraded hard drive, and a Blueberry iMac (which matches the iBook). OS 10.2.8 on everything but the iMac.

smaller, to fit (I hope)

I wonder if Leica would swap out the gunsight on my original 0-Series for the new

straight-through finder ... they probably would if I would pay for it, but I don't mind

the gunsight that much.

An English article, following up on Volker's post of the German

article the other day. The 0-Series returns!

 

http://www.photoscala.com/node/view/244

Does anyone know if this version would have the self-capping shutter? That book, "Leica: Eyewitness to a Century," said the second version of the nullseries did have such a shutter. However, it also said the first 0-Series replica that Leica put out also had a self-capping shutter, which is not the case.

 

Like others, I am curious as to why Leica is going down this road again, given the drubbing they got for the first camera.

Grant, are you sure that guy isn't dead?