francis smith

This is may be what seperates an artist from a craftsman; it comes from early 19th c. Romantic philosophy. All art creation does relate to the created world (i.e., it relates to "reality" in that it shows a bird, a square, a color). In creating his object, the artist takes his experience of the created world and descends into the darkness, or indeed, the lightness, of his soul; there this experience of the created world is transformed. Through the disciplined skills of his medium, he creates the object which expresses this transformed experience.

 

This process can happen in an instant or over a decade. It may happen consciously or unconsciously; in fact, it probably is best if it happens unconsciously. It can be painful or pleasurable, easy or difficult. In our society we tend to see it as difficult, so most people shy away from it.

 

But it is this process that will cause the photographer to tweek the angle just a bit, to change the depth of field, etc. The artist is always asking-- does what I see through my lense-- does it reflect my experience?

 

If you want to open this up, I suggest you try the Artist's Way by Julia Cameron.

 

A photography mentor of mine took a class with Lisette Modell. During a critique, Modell said of one student's proferred image: this is a picture of a boring person, taken by a boring person. I guess that's a particularly harsh way of saying there was no depth of feeling. Without depth of feeling, the object may show excellent facility, but it may be simply facile.

Well, just as I was acclimating to the square, I went and purchased a Mamiya 645 1000s with 80 mm f1.9 , 150 mm f4, AE prism, and power grip, all for 1500 bucks. I will keep my Yaschicamat for "dangerous" work-- I know of photos I want to take while wading a stream, next to a pool, etc. My Mamiya will not be hanging out at the beach anytime soon....

 

But it's true, I simply had to keep working w/ the Yaschicamat and I got toward some peace with the square. Thanks for your input.

thank you for your advice. I was at the guys house, and I checked my email and received your input. I did purchase the unit, and am feeling good about my purchase. I feel it is a good buy, and is worth the money. I did not check out the flash synch-- but I'm not too concerned because I don't think I ever used my flash while working in 35mm. The body is in remarkably good shape. There's only one sign of a knock, and that's on the paint on the prism. I do need to clean it up a bit-- to make it perfect. I know there are instructions on that somewhere, so I'll look for them. Again, thank you for your advice.

 

Peace, and Merry Christmas--

 

Francis Smith

Kodak's spec sheet on T400CN reads well for exposure latitude. Says even without push processing, over exposing does okay. Push processing is recommended for 1600, most certainly advised for 3200. Pushing by a factor of two for the latter, or even former. But, don't take my amateur word for it-- look on their website! And please, anyone, answer my question under Mamiya:1000s-- jump or wait?

 

thanks. Francis

Greetings-- I'm considering a 645 1000s. w/ power drive, AE prism

finder, 80 mm f/1.9, 150 mm f/4; 1,2,3 macro duto rings, 120 & 220

backs-- all for $1500. Seller says it's hardly been used.

 

Does this sound like a good deal?

 

Will I be able to hot switch the film?

 

Will I be able to use digital, poloroid, etc. backs?

 

Is there any reason why I should hold out for a pro or super?

 

Thank you,

Francis Smith

I got my enlargments, printed on kodak rc-- the full name slips my mind. they came out okay-- though lacking in the accutance which i love. I'm now shooting landscapes in chromes-- having learned my lesson on tcn, I have ordered a whole variety of chrome film-- I'm enjoying the process. My next thing is to look at how TCN can be pushed-- see what happens to it. since I'm not crazy about it-- or b&W right now-- I'm just gonna have fun with it-- see what happens.

I want to use my Yaschicamat (plain old) on a tripod-- above my

head. I want a head that will allow the holder -- or whatever the

platform is called-- to swivel thus that I can look up into it from

below. I'd like this on a tripod that is around 6 feet tall. I'd

rather not go out shooting with a ladder. My little Geo Metro

convertible could not hold it! Also, in general, I want a good

tripod for less than 200 bucks. Ideas?

I've used it for maybe 12 rolls of 120-- i've had them developed at a commercial photo place in Westport CT-- just about the only game in town-- and printed on that kodak paper which is super contrasty-- i don't recall the name. I took them up to Atlantic Filmworks in Hamden CT-- the guy there said that he feels TCN400 is a bit mushy-- has to do with a sort of bubble like with a crystal core kinda grain structure. I had just purchased thirty rolls of this film in nyc! Well, I think I will use the TCN 400 for pictures of humans-- and use a tripod with slow slow film for my landscape work. I use a plain YaschicaMat with a gossen luna lux light meter. I will be getting my first enlargements in a few days. He suggested I not go above 11 x 11-- but that may have more to do with of my need for a tripod. I will keep you informed.

I purchased a plain YaschicaMat at a yard sale for 10 bucks. I

previously used a Minolta x 700. I have a seriously extensive

background in art and indeed, though it was fourteen years ago, a

gallery owner in NY was asking me to really make those final prints

to show collectors.... so recently when folks have said-- maybe you

need to take a composition class-- well, I was taken aback! I just

taught a class on composition in painting! Think about it-- the

square is incredibly unnatural-- we humans perceive our world through

a rectangle or lozenge shape. How great many paintings can you think

of that are square? Some by Titian immediately pop to mind, but

little else. Please, I need help. Do you know of books of

photography where the works are by and large square? Can you think

of paintings that are the same? I really really want to study how my

forerunners have dealt with the square. I've taken 10K photos in

35mm-- maybe 300 in 6 x 6. Yes I could crop the view, but I consider

this a challenge which I want to face.