Tony Rowlett

Please provide input on the organization of this forum. Under consideration are the following categories. Will they be useful?

<p>

<ul>

<li>Photokina (new products anounced there, etc.)

<li>Leica Clones (Russian, etc.)

<li>Leica Photographers (DAH,HCB,SS, etc.)

</ul>

Also, it may be getting time to list a link to categories whose questions are no longer "new." Each link will show the number of messages in that category. The benefit is faster loading of the initial page. The down side is the necessity of clicking on the link which people might not be inclined to do. Input please.

Not enough contrast and overall darkness to appear as one of Mike's.

The d-max needs to be higher.

This is a beautiful and powerful portrait that portrays warmth and a

deep sense of caring and sweetness in your subject, title

notwithstanding. I am immediately taken with her eyes and the sense

of calmness. It may actually be therapeutic to simply gaze into this

photograph! I hope you are proud of this nice work, and I wish her

the happiest outcome.

This is low value overload to me. I appreciate the subject, but I

can't see it well enough to appreciate it to the degree that it

deserves appreciation. It makes the finger prints show up on my

monitor too well.

This is really one of the best portraits I've seen! Absolutely

hilarious. What an actor this fellow is. And whatever it is he looks

like he's yelling but not, he's the perfect person to portray the

part. And if I were ever to be sold on the concept of "color

portraiture," this would be the straw. Excellent work, Tom!<p>

*ahem* I really can't resist this, so for you Windows lovers, please

forgive me:<p>

<font size="+2"><b>"NOT THAT BLASTED BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH

AGAIN!!!!</b></font>

The bottom shouldn't be cropped so heavily. The noodles need at least

something to be heading into. I think the photo works, though. He's

really cute. I love how intent-looking kids can get when they're

doing something. His eyes aren't really in focus, but I realize his

eyes aren't the point of interest, but they kind of ought to be if

they're to remain in the photograph. His eyes are more important than

the thing he's squeezing the noddles from. Maybe this one was too

close. Just an ultra-tiny bit over exposed.

Correction: She, not "the," doesn't look that thrilled.

Yeah, check out that smirk. The two definitely have different ideas

floating through their heads. The doesn't look that thrilled,

actually. Happy and content maybe, but distracted. They're both

distracted by something, but not the same thing. Her expression

appears like a mask. I like the color saturation, especially the red

from her blouse complementing the green of his jersey. I don't know

what to think about seeing the driver. It's probably good, but I

wonder if being a bit closer would have helped isolate them from a

background that isn't really that significant. I might have said to

frame slightly to the left to compensate for the direction of his

stare and to include the rest of his arm when there's a football field

of space beyond her far arm, but maybe being a bit unconventional

helps.

Very nice portrait of a very pretty young woman. The characteristics

that pop out at me besides her beauty are the brilliant contrast and

the excellent composition/cropping. One thing I've learned from this

forum (including from Mike Dixon) is that space above a person's head

is not always that important and in fact you can cut pretty deeply

into the top and actually add to the strength of the composition.

This is nice work.<p>

By the way. I've learned another thing. It is almost impossible to

show how to post images to greenspun.com (not photo.net) forums

in a <i>clear, concise, meaningful, and reliable way</i> because in

ones examples it's difficult to include the left (less than) and right

(greater than) angle-brackets unless you include escape characters

which makes it a pain. The best way, of course, is to examine the

"source" of another's post that includes an image. But I

don't mind visiting the gallery area of photo.net as you have included

here.

With the disappearing daylight (especially in Alaska), I will be taking out the Noctilux more often to catch some available darkness. Although I own the lens, I don't have much experience using it. It's big and heavy so it always takes a back seat to my 50 'cron. How have you been using your Noct. and what kinds of results are you getting?

Both of these photographs are beautiful and very well done. I as well

am intrigued by the purplish tint. I use selenium toner

(1:15;80F;6-8') but have not yet gotten such a nice effect as these.

I am definitely one for grain, but use only TMY and Z. From the

comments above, I'm definitely going to have to give Ilford's 3200 a

try! Very nice work, Mike.

Steve, no offense was taken, but I did seem to be in a

desperate search for the firmest ground possible, didn't I? Sorry

about that. I didn't mean to come off as vigilant. You brought up a

hot and current issue. That is why I've actually tried to get

<i>some</i> positive acknowlegement from subjects before I shoot, but

it isn't always possible or beneficial to some "photographic goal."

(and boy does THAT bring up some questions!)

Because I'm ruthless with a camera, that's why.<p>

I regularly respect the wishes of potential subjects, even in candid

scenarios, and I even have been asking permission sometimes (as

opposed to waiting for a specific smile or welcoming "glint" in

people's eyes), especially in countries other than the U.S. But I

also make a conscious effort not to take the notion of "victimizing"

too far or too seriously. The fact of the matter is, I don't

always ask permission, and sometimes I get shots of people who

would prefer not to be photographed. It's sometimes the nature of

being a street photographer, and it requires judgment and sensitivity.

Was I insensitive here? I don't know the answer, and neither do you

for sure. You

gotta admit, though, if you had to ask permission from everyone you

took

photographs of, you'd end up with quite a few boring, posed shots,

wouldn't you?<p>

It didn't appear to me that this little girl specifically did NOT want

me to take her photograph. From a few minutes leading up to the

moment of the exposure, it was clear she was simply playing hide and

go seek me and other members of my party. Here, she bolted to behind

somebody standing next to me, not because she was afraid of being

photographed, but because she was playing a game. And she won!

<center>

<img src="http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/356-21.jpg" width=608 height=411><p>"Tijuana, Mexico"

</center>

<p>

More children selling trinkits, etc. The one on the right began to bolt right when I raised my camera to shoot.

<center>

<img src="http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/356-13.jpg" width=347 height=338>

<p>

"Tijuna, Mexico"

</center>

<p>

She is a little street girl selling trinkets, beads, etc.

This is priceless!! And perfectly done. Are they sisters? Beautiful

work.

That's a pretty good anecdote, Al. <p>

Off the top of my head, while not actually photographing, I once put

Photo-Flo into my fixer thinking it was hardner (similar bottles).

Really irked myself because I do all the mixing first, then start the

development. So during development, I had to remix the fixer and I

got all stressed out and well... needless to say, I pay attention to

my chemical bottles. I wonder if it would have hurt anything? I can

probably think of more things. Will be interesting to read further

responses.

I don't at all understand Wayne's (and Jeff's) interpretation above.

I don't understand "...troubling, almost ugly, bothersome..." but

maybe I get a little "unsettling." It's amazing how so very little

one eye of a person's face is able to reveal about the person. The

whole must be much more than the sum of its parts, in this case.

I like that there is some space above your subject's head because it

gives me the sense of impending motion - that of him raising his head

above his hat, like to say Boo or to stick out his tongue - because

of his lively expression (all of which is by the eyes, by the way!).

An appealing photograph in a whimsical sort of way. I like it.

I read/viewed - no, absorbed, completely -- this man's photography

of Cuba with great interest, and my own feelings are now reinforced:

Take the 50 (or the 35) and make photography happen. This man is a

great in the works. The color is fantastic, isn't it?? I might have

a hundred Leica lenses, or I might have only the 50 'cron... which way

am I better prepared for the world? I know the answer...

Rats! Next time I'll know better. It would have been nice to meet,

tour, and discuss.<p>

Before posting the image, I never paid the harsh shadow and light much

thought. Although it is not as harsh in the print, it still detracts.

For the curious lurkers who haven't posted any photography yet, this

forum really does work!

I will offer the general answer, and let others give specific

uses and recommendations: Pushing film means exposing and processing

it as if it were more light sensitive than its ISO rating would

indicate, which in many films is not that precise anyway. Pushing

film means underexposing it from slightly to excessively, and

compensating by extending the development, usually by time.

<center>

<img src="http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/334-8.jpg" width=509 height=757><p><b>"Testing the Waters"</b>

</center>

<center>

<img src="http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/339-26.jpg" height=635 width=479></center><p>

Anchorage is proud of our Scotty Gomez, here holding the Stanley Cup, NHL 2000 Rookie of the Year!

She resembles the movie star Sandra B(sp?)luc. Pretty woman.