seanmoran

<p>Could be the same scamster. Or a relative perhaps.</p>

<p>Actually, I liked the subheadings that the editor put into my article - he has a nice way with a pun. The one you mention is a play on the words of Romans 6:23 ('The wages of sin ...') which he's altered to: 'The wagers of greed'. Works for me, since the punters are greedily wagering (but in vain).</p>

<p>Thanks for your comments,<br>

Seán</p>

 

<p>Here's a recent article of mine in <em>Philosophy Now: </em><br>

<em>https://philosophynow.org/issues/114/Paltering_In_Paris</em><br /> <em><br /></em>I took the photograph of this Paris criminal street gang using a Leica M3 and Summicron Rigid, on Ilford hp5+. One of the shills expressed his unhappiness at my taking photographs, so I boldly (or foolishly) took out my notebook and asked for his name. He said:"Monsieur, my name is Michael Jackson." Great fun.<br /> All the best,<br /> Seán in Ireland.<br /> PS The photograph in the print version of the magazine is much better quality.</p><div></div>

<p>If airport security ask me to 'turn on' my Leica M3, I won't be able to oblige.</p>

<p><em>" ... the UK's hand luggage rules also mention tablets, MP3 players, cameras and electric shavers as other examples.'</em></p>

<p>http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28193654</p>

<p>Any advice?</p>

<p>All the best,</p>

<p>Seán in Tipperary</p>

<p> </p>

<p>May you derive much enjoyment from your new Leica, Mukul. It's good that it has a few blemishes. You won't feel guilty about adding a few more on the Delhi streets in the years ahead All the best, Seán.</p>

I went through a phase of not using a meter with my M2 and M3. It does educate your eye and certainly forces you to be more attuned to the light. The downside though is in the darkroom: instead of most negs requiring the same enlarger exposure-time, there is much more of a variation from one neg to the next. After compensating in the darkroom, most of my estimates yielded technically good prints, but took more attempts to arrive at this acceptable standard. These are 'work prints' I'm talking about. For a later fibre-based print of the best work, I'm willing to take my time, but when it comes to churning out a couple of dozen prints (to live with for a while before deciding what to print to a higher standard) I don't want to mess about in the darkroom more than I have to.

 

So, what it boils down to is this: do you save five seconds by not taking a meter-reading, if this means an extra ten minutes' work on the print in the darkroom? Or do you take a reading (and perhaps modify it by using a bit of photographic intelligence) thus minimising the time later to be spent printing it. This is analogous to studio engineers capturing a good performance versus 'fixing it in the mix'. Of course, if something amazing is happening in front of you and there isn't time, then shooting first and measuring the light later is the best strategy.

 

Best wishes,

 

Sean.

What fun you can have!

 

Sean.

Another vote for HP5+.

 

We should support Ilford, who have kept in operation by the managers putting their faith (and their own savings and borrowings) into the company.

 

(Contrast this with Chinese companies - some of whom use child labour and subject their workers to appalling conditions)

 

The best reason of all for supporting the English firm, of course, is the quality of the Ilford stable of products.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean.

Hello there Andre,

 

The instructions attached to DDX bottles give 7min 30s as the time for HP5+ at ISO 200 (20degC). This is what I use and it works well - smooth, long tonal-scale, tiny grain, lovely skin tones (perhaps a little 'flat', but you can print on grade 2.5 or 3 to compensate).

 

Enjoy,

 

Sean.

Hello Emily,

 

I live in Belfast, where you can photograph just about anything you like in public, but I understand that things are not so congenial for photographers in London. I am led to believe that rentacop-type goons will try to stop you taking photographs in the vicinity of Trafalgar Square if they suspect that you are a professional. The use of a tripod may cause them to draw this conclusion.

 

Perhaps some London-based photographers can confirm this?

 

Cheers,

 

Sean.

Yes - here in Belfast.

 

Oh sorry - I thought you said Northern Ireland.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean ;-)

Hello Jonas,

 

I reckon it depends on what you mean by "Caucasian skin". Here in Northern Ireland, many people would have pale skin and this would correspond to zone VI - in other words one stop brighter than zone V (mid-grey). So you would meter from the face and open up a stop. Somebody with a fake (or even real) tan might have skin which would fall on zone V, thus needing no compensation when using reflected metering.

 

Of course, if you measure the light *falling* on the subject (ie incident metering using an invercone or similar) none of this zoney compensation is needed.

 

Cheers,

 

Se�n

Sorry Nuno ... you said you don't like powders ... so I recommended a powder :-{

 

Cheers,

 

Sean.

Ilford Perceptol will soon be available again (and if you can't wait, Moersch EFG is an exact clone of it).

 

Enjoy,

 

Sean.

People with interesting faces.

 

(especially in County Leitrim)

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

(Who has a house in Leitrim)

Hello Andrew,

 

Congratulations on obtaining a place on the course. I wish I was doing the same.

 

In what way do you feel that the Pentax A3 is deficient? After 25 years of using Pentax K1000 and KM cameras, I recently treated myself to a Leica M2 and Summicron 50mm. Naturally, I was interested to compare the Leica with the trusty Pentax, so I did some tests: taking the same picture twice and switching cameras.

 

To my surprise, there was very little difference between portraits taken on the Summicron at f/4 and on the Pentax 50mm f/1.7 at f/4. Perhaps the Pentax had a fraction more microcontrast, but perhaps also the Leica had a touch more 'roundness' in its imaging. I don't think that equipment is the limiting factor in our quest to improve our photography - unless you have very specialist interests. The Leica is now my constant companion - and I love using it (the haptics are even better than Pentax [do you remember the advertising slogan "Just hold a Pentax"?]) - but I can't say hand on heart that it has improved the technical quality of my photographs.

 

Perhaps wait until you start the course and run up against equipment limitations before you spend your $2000? Or are you concerned that fellow students will sneer at your gear?

 

I once went to a traditional Irish music 'session' in a pub in Donegal. A smartly-dressed man produced a beautiful French violin from a velvet-lined fitted case and started to play it with a silver-mounted bow, and do you know what? ... he was terrible.

 

Later on in the evening a bedraggled, unshaven farmer appeared and dragged a battered Chinese fiddle from a case held together with insulating tape, and do you know what? ... he was terrible as well.

 

Cheers,

 

Seán.

Another vote for HP5+.

 

I use nothing else and it seems able to do everything - portraiture, street, travel, even architectural/landscape. Ilford has started making Microphen (for speed increase) and ID-11 (general purpose) again, but not, I think, Perceptol (for fine grain). However, Moersch make an exact clone of Perceptol (called 'EFG') which I get from Retrophotographic and use 1:1, rating the HP5+ at ISO 200 and developing for 15 mins at 68F/20C.

 

Support Ilford: they have shown commitment to black and white photography.

 

Best wishes,

Sean.

Hello Paul,

 

I've been very happy with the work of Malcolm Taylor (tel: 01568 770542). He'll examine your lens, give you a quote first and then do a thorough job. His is not a budget operation, but he is *very* good (the Leica museum even let him work on the Ur-Leica, so he tells me.) He has all sorts of specialist Leica tools, collimators, vacuum coating machines and a lot of experience. He operates from a farmhouse in Herefordshire, so he's probably the same repairer you haev heard about.

 

If you do ring him, say that Seán in Belfast recommended him.

 

Best wishes,

 

Seán.

Hello there, Sam.

 

Are you sure it's not Econotol2? I thought Econodev was a print developer. I used Econotol2 with Ilford HP5+ when I couldn't get any Perceptol (now I use Moersch's Perceptol lookalike: EFG) and it was fine, but times were a bit short so it was easy to overdevelop.

 

Best wishes,

 

Sean.

Steady on, friends!

 

This was on film, remember, not digital. Plus, it was at the beginning of a roll. Furthermore, and I'm ashamed to say this, the story was more interesting than the pictures will be. However, if you look in my gallery, you'll see one photograph of an earlier encounter with the PSNI. This time, I got in there, got my picture and got out, without anyone - miscreants or police - even noticing my presence. This was using a Leica II lookalike - a Fed 1 with collapsible Elmar f3.5 copy.

 

Thanks for your kind words about the story.

 

Best wishes,

 

Sean.

I left my apartment in Belfast just now, to be confronted by an armed

beefy plain-clothes chap holding a walkie-talkie, shortly followed by

two uniformed police officers in a squad car. Beefy said he'd

followed me and wanted to know why I'd just photographed a Brinks-Mat

security van delivering cash in Lisburn Road. "Comedy value", says I.

This was not the answer he was expecting. I complimented him on

getting to me so quickly and explained that the van was awkwardly

parked and buses etc were having to drive around it, creating a

quirky, comical effect which I had photographed. The uniformed

officers were equally non-plussed, but once I had established that I

had committed no offence and asserted my right to photograph just

about anything in a public place, I pointed out that If I was planning

a robbery (as they had suggested) I was being a bit blatant and

hamfisted about it. I then shook hands with them all and went off to

buy some frozen peas. I wish I had had the presence of mind to ask

for a group photograph, but I only thought of it after the event.

Looking back, the things that led to a successful resolution of what

was potentially a tricky situation were: 1. I shook hands with each

of Belfast's finest when I first met each of them and introduced

myself 2. When the police explained that the driver of the security

van had felt threatened by me and had pressed his emergency button,

thus alerting them, I told them that he had not seemed distressed to

me and in fact had combed his hair for one of the photographs. I

asked them to communicate to him the fact that I am a harmless amateur

photographer and not a bandit. There have been quite a few heists in

Northern Ireland over the last few months, so I can sort of appreciate

his misgivings, but I did point out that I was pointing a camera at

him, not a gun. 3. (This is the one of interest to Leica-users) When

the nice police-woman eventually persuaded me (not demanded) to see my

camera, I pulled out a Leica M2, which she immediately recognised as

non-digital and she visibly relaxed. Armed robbers don't normally use

vintage Leicas, apparently

 

I was impressed with the Police Service of Northern Ireland. They did

their duty in a polite and tactful manner and did not try to make up

some offence to intimidate me. They recognised that I had done

nothing wrong and said that if I was reported photographing any more

security vans, I could expect the police to check me out again. Fair

enough.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

PS I shot Gerry Adams on the Falls Road a couple of weeks ago (1/500 @

f/8), but that's another story.

Hello Paula,

 

Moersch EFG is an exact clone of Perceptol. I'm using it with HP5+ rated at ISO 200 and loving it. Retrophotographic in the UK stocks it, but there may well be other sources.

 

Good luck,

 

Sean.

... sorry .. should have said it's at: Community | Forums | Leica Photography | Leica versus (this versus that...)

 

Cheers,

 

Sean.

Hello Jack,

 

I did a (not very scientific) test comparing a Pentax-M 50mm f1.7 with a Leica Summicron-M 50mm about a week ago. There's an interesting thread on it over on the Leica forum: take a look.

 

Best wishes,

 

Sean.

C'mon Bill!

 

My question was a serious one, following a real-world empirical test. Admittedly it was based on a limited sample (i.e. one of each), but I was surprised. What am I to read into your curt answer? Pentax lenses are excellent? Leica lenses are over-rated? Please elaborate.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean.

This morning, I took several pairs of hand-held portraits of the

concierge of my apartment block, switching between a newly-CLA'd rigid

Summicron 50mm [on an M2] and a 1970's Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7 [on a KM].

Shutter speeds indoors were around 1/60th, outdoors around 1/250th,

and apertures were in the f/4 - f/5.6 region. This afternoon I

developed the two rolls of Ilford HP5+ (rated 200ISO) for 15 mins in

Perceptol in the same tank, and this evening I printed several of the

pairs up to 9.5in. x 12in. I used a 50mm f/2.8 Nikkor EL enlarging

lens, stopped down 2 stops, and glossy Multigrade IV developed in

fresh Ilford Multigrade developer.

 

The similarity amazed me! If I hadn't folded over a few mm of corner

of the Pentax prints during processing, I would have struggled to tell

them apart.

 

The Summicron results initially looked about half a grade softer than

the Pentax-M, but I compensated for this by printing the Leica

photographs half a grade harder. If there are any differences, it

could be that the Pentax shows fractionally more micro-contrast and

the Leica produces slightly 'rounder' looking results, but this may

just be me convincing myself that there is something to separate two

cameras with a 40:1 price-differential (second-hand).

 

Are you as amazed as I was? ... or am I missing something obvious?

 

Cheers,

 

Sean (in Belfast)