Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] LF Ramblings (was: Re: OM-5D macro comparisons)

Subject: [OM] LF Ramblings (was: Re: OM-5D macro comparisons)
From: Dawid Loubser <dawid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 00:04:15 +0200
On 31 Jan 2012, at 4:39 PM, Ken Norton wrote:

> While I pretty much agree with Dawid about the format trumps lenses
> argument, where I do part ways is in the logistical aspects of  
> shooting the
> different formats. I'm usually more than happy to trade image  
> quality for
> being able to get the image. For me, this is usually the greater  
> concern.


Ken,

I used to agree, but for my flavour of photography it's no longer the  
case. These days, if I can't get the shot properly, I don't get it at  
all. I have too many "barely got it" images, what do I want to do with  
them? Waste my time printing them? Late last year, on a 5,500km road  
trip, I shot a mere 100 images in total. No 35mm. We would visit the  
most astounding place, and I would take four images during the whole  
day. I shot mostly Ilford Pan F rated at ISO32, 6x7cm format.

I am slowly printing my way through them, but - based on my standards  
- the prints are to die for so far. Pan F just eats up the dynamic  
range of every single image I threw at it (with guessed exposure all  
the way, it's almost impossible to make a bad exposure on this stuff)  
and the conveyance of the "feel" of the place is pure and brutally  
vivid in most cases. It was immensely tiring to lug a 10Kg backpack  
around with me, but I'll do it again and again now. The OM kit was for  
backup, and I took a couple of snapshots here and there. But almost  
every image on a larger format - that forced me to take a couple of  
moments, or minutes, to compose - is just so much better.

I'm not in the business of fast-paced documentary, or of taking  
snapshots. I'm not in the photography "business", period. I am in the  
hobby of carefully crafted images, and that's worth using the best  
for. The best is larger film formats. The best has almost nothing to  
do with lenses or camera types.

The macro image I posted was a one-in-ten chance image. The Moth was  
alive, and sitting on a bush on a windy beach, gently swaying in the  
wind. After composing the image (which involved some mild focal plane  
adjustments, under a hot dark cloth in the brutal sun, and  
familiarising myself with the oscillating behaviour of the scene to  
and from the camera, taking care to focus the subject as it moved  
closest to the camera in the cycle) I loaded my film holder, looked at  
the subject with my naked eyes, waited for the right time in the wind- 
induced oscillation cycle, and fired the shutter at what I thought was  
a good speed to freeze the motion. Afterwards I guessed that I'd have  
to push the film to ISO1600 given my exposure (and the need to  
compensate ~two stops for a 1:1 enlargement). I made one image only,  
because the moth promptly departed thereafter, and I had just exposed  
my last sheet of film.

You know what? If I didn't get the shot, it wouldn't have bothered me  
too much. But everything fell into place, and this image looks great  
even at giant magnification. I made this image, and I could not have  
captured it on a better medium. This is my idea of photography.

Practice practice practice. Print print print. That's what matters.

(especially to Moose:) If I ever gave the idea on this mailing list  
that I obsess about miniscule differences in lenses, I do apologise.  
Nothing is currently further from the truth. I'd shoot without a lens  
(pinhole) if it bought me more time in the darkroom, and in the good  
light.

My OM-3Ti is a beautiful and functional fetish object for sure, but I  
just can't get excited about the results in 35mm film at this time.  
Perhaps I'll feel different next month, or year :-)


On 31 Jan 2012, at 4:39 PM, Ken Norton wrote:

> I've got that nasty itch again aboiut getting a large-format camera.  
> Now
> that I've got a decent 4x5 color enlarger, my darkroom is fully  
> equipped
> for handling 4x5 in every way. Some of those field cameras are quite  
> small.
> I figure that if I'm going to haul a second beastly system around, I  
> might
> as well go all the way.


Indeed you should, Ken. I must admit, carefully-made 6x7cm does  
produce the most keepers for me, it's just the tiny bit more agile  
than large format. I have serious love/hate affairs with my large- 
format camera, but when it works, it works like no other.

Dawid
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz