starshooter

<p>focus</p>

<p>One of the all time great cameras.</p>

<p>I am gobsmacked.</p>

<p>I guess the question is simply -- was there a magical moment and you missed, or was there just not a magical moment that showed itself?<br>

When working with kids you can stand on your head if that gets a laugh and loosens them up but that would hardly be the thing to do here. Short of setting up an elaborate photo (sunlight beaming through the window and "anointing" the young one) you probably have to go with what you got.</p>

<p>It will fly in this day and age when high button shoes and running boards on cars come back into vogue.<br>

Pardon me while I finish building my latest Steampunk Camera....</p>

<p>I went to a Halloween party as an olde tyme photojournalist with a pin-stripe suit and a press card in my hat and a Rolleiflex and an ancient electronic flash. I had a 50-year-old camera and ten-year-old Tri-X b&w film. The film had fog issues but the pro lab I sent it to did a fabulous job and the party photos were great.<br>

Right now I have a roll of Ektachrome 35mm film I shot 20 years ago and am trying to decide where to send it to get it developed.</p>

<p>Nice photos. I really like the young couple dancing. An old time photojournalist like me was always told you can't go wrong with photos of pretty ladies, kids and animals. And you didn't -- you hit the nail right on the head.</p>

<p>As a photojournalist I carried a press card for many years. I have even had Secret Service, Olympics and United Nations press cards. Press cards used to be magic especially in New York City and Los Angeles because the police were known to be serious about checking press card holders out.<br>

But today's world is a different one. A lot of jurisdictions don't give out press cards, they are afraid of a lawsuit for preventing legitimate press photographers from doing their job.<br>

As for non-press photographers, the world seems to be full of busybodies these days. I wonder what having a "large camera" has to do with anything.<br>

I read about one guy who wore a loud neon safety-type sleeveless jacket when he did street photography -- no one could say he was sneaking around. Maybe you should think about a jacket that says "Bird Photographer" in big letters on the back. You should not have to do this but times are a'changing and not for the better. Good luck.</p>

<p>Well, Matt, unfortunatlely for you the truth is in disrepute these days. In other words I agree with you but we're voices howling in the wilderness.</p>

<p>Artsy-Fartsy.</p>

<p>Cranky? Some people go ballistic. But that happens a lot when somebody dismisses this camera or that technique or the other lens. People tend to have strong opinions about their gear, technique and favorite photographers. It helps, when you express an opinion or broach an idea, to not put down those who are doing things a different way. But I am always amazed at how much photo knowledge is stored up in the brains in the guys and gals who are behind the posts here.</p>

<p>Malarky is where it is at.</p>

<p>I think Mr. Brown is saying exactly what I said but in a different way.</p>

<p>In the early 1970s I spent a lot of time in Manhattan, New York getting on and off subways and buses with lots of camera equipment. This included carrying a 500mm lens, not in a case, when I was going from East 42nd Street to Yankee Stadium and back. I never once had any hassle with any person. So much for the perils of the big, bad city. You never know. Great story and I like the photo a lot.</p>

<p>Law enforcement personnel are not allowed to commit crimes against citizens "under the color of law." In other words they cannot mumble something about the photographer breaking the law when (s)he was not breaking any laws and then arrest the photog, steal his/her camera, and so on. Theft is theft.<br>

However, keep in mind one thing. I once asked an attorney, "can they do that to me?" and he said "yes, they can do it. The question is, can they get by with it?"<br>

The cops are organized. Most photographers have no Big Daddy group to go to to obtain justice.<br>

I know a lot of darn good law enforcement officers. But like any other profession, there are those who are venal, paranoid and just plain onrey.</p>

<p>Digital media is ephermal. I have some 8.5 inch computer disks that are pretty darn hard to find a way to read. But not only do digital delivery systems (disks, memory drives, etc.) disappear, the 1s and 0s on them will sooner or later disappear.<br>

Relying on digital media for long term storage is like saving film on nitrate based stock. <br>

Hollywood backs up its digital movies on film.<br>

I have family photos from the 1920s and the b&w photo prints are as clear as the day they were shot.</p>

<p>I know a lot of first year art photography students who could do better. High scores for routine banality. The reason they sell so cheap for "art" is because they are not very good.</p>

<p>What is a Flickr? I remember "My Friend Flicka" with Preston Foster. Family movie. As for sharing photos is there anything wrong with e-mail?</p>

<p>People will be people and they will take something good and beat it to death. There are folks out there that don't take photos of their subjects, they take photos of their out-of-focus backgrounds. And other who stretch HDR to new heights of silliness. But this has always been the case. In the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s they raised cornball "cutsie" photos of small animals and kiddies to the point you wanted to barf. Who know what the next dumb fad will be? I try to ignore it all.</p>

<p>I've been trying to take a decent photo of Gambel's Quail on my front porch with a DSLR Nikon and a (non-auto) 500 mm Vivitar mirror lens. Let me tell you at this point I have to conclude the birds are smarter than I am. They seem to smell when I am pointing my camera at them despite my putting up an elaborate "blind." It's hard to get closer because then they would be in the shade. <br>

Nikon makes some very good lens extenders and you might think about a shorter, presumably cheaper, lens and an extender. Good luck.</p>

<p>Now THAT is a camera. However, I must say that when I broke into the newspaper business "the boys" (and they were mostly male) used 4x5 Speed Graphics. You would be surprised at what you can shoot hand held with one of these. A New York Daily News photog shot a photo of an Army B25 bomber that slammed into the Empire State Building in the late 1940s. They lowered him out of a window above the bomber, which was stuck into the side of the building dozens of stories above the ground, and held him by the legs upside down while he shot the photo. Try that with your camera. In a hurry. But yours is a great box, I do not deny it.</p>

<p>I suspect you'd get your knickers in a twist if someone told you "bokeh b.s." is mostly crap. If you don't like a lens then don't use it but trying to bully everybody is not very nice and shows a lack of taste and perception. There are people who see things differently than you do and want to make photos that are different from your efforts. It's is okay. You do not run the universe.</p>

<p>You are a better man than I, Gunga Din.</p>

<p>I Leica NOOKY.<br>

What I mean to say is that this crowd is perhaps more knowledgeable about Leica parts than, well, the "cheating side of town," as the Eagles put it.</p>

<p>Oh you young whippersnappers. I was a newspaper photographer in the early 1960s and quite often the Society Editor (for women's interest pages, back then) would let the photogs know somebody phoned her and said they had a wedding real soon and didn't have a photographer. So I'd load Tri-X b&w film into my Rolleiflex and take a few rolls.<br>

I hate to tell you guys this but from what I see (including in Rangefinder Magazine) nobody shoots weddings any more. They shoot "Princess For A Day" photos, not holy matrimony.<br>

I remember one striking photograph of a bride in her wedding gown floating on the surface of a small pond. Clever, but not Holy Matrimony.<br>

Back in Iowa we used to slop the hogs. Now a lot of folks slop the Internet with zillions of not-so-hot alleged photographs.<br>

As for Photoslop -- don't get me started.</p>