Re: Henk Thijs via Blurb
Hank , Did you check that Panasonic with Elmarit , better or worse than Sony with Zeiss Tessar ?
Zeiss is vario tessar and tessar is father of elmar and elmax.
I really find that leica will never be the old leica because they shut down the optical glass lab.
It is not available at world same glass at the patents and older lenses.
And I read many tests and summicron is still the best lens from leica , there is mountain difference between elmarit and summicron.
Judy , If you want a leica , buy it from leica with summicron lens.
I saw 40 000 dollars S2 pictures and i felt headache , it is colorful like a japanese polyurethane painted manga and at the dark pictures goes to purple or green.
I think leica must open their glass lab or schott must start to produce high ref index high abbe number glass.
I will keep hektor and summitar and kodachrome ,
I think it is good idea to manufacture plastic leitz bodies for screw lenses.
It makes me nervous to carry a art piece in the middle of streets which can shoot da vinci pictures.
Carrying a history for street photography is not a good idea for me.
At the future , I will buy various Leitz lenses with slide film , take van gogh , da vinci , rembrandt paintings at the museums , print at home and come again and compare.
I think I am diving in to the Leica fantasies again ... stop stop and focus on your ham radio , dont waste any money..
:)
Umut
On 6/19/09, henk thijs <henk.thijs@hetnet.nl> wrote:
Hi Judy,
Mentioning your problems carrying heavy weight camera's (for that reason i switched years ago from Leica to Pentax - never regret it) for certain situations i bought a digital compact camera allowing RAW-format :
the Panasonic DMC-LX2 'LUMIX', with a Leitz (!) Vario-Elmarit 1:2.8 - 4.9 zoom (6.3 to 25.2) about 222 gram.
all the best and thanks for your comments - without PostFactory there would be no (tri)gum print in the book!!
cheers,
Henk
On 19 jun 2009, at 7:45, Judy Seigel wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, henk thijs wrote:
I myself still love the feeling of a book in my hands, from Malamud to Alex Web, from McEwan to Pentti Sammallahti .... and to produce one myself was a great experience .
Especially a "picture book"...
But what I want to know is how Henk shoots these folks unawares. Hidden camera?
Street photography for me is just a matter of always carrying a camera without the goal of making 'street photography';
Exactly ... but my little digital camera, at 14.4 ounces, is kind of a wreck, having spent years in the bottom of my purse with the loose change and cracker crumbs -- tho I can't really upgrade because all the "better" ones (especially the ones with changeable lenses) weigh too much to carry always everywhere, including with 10 pounds of groceries...
....when i want to make a certain picture i make some to the left , some to the right , some in the air and in between the one i want to make ....
Very ingenious ... tho I don't know about in NYC -- as soon as folks spot a photographer, they tend to pose, run, or give you the finger, so your "scene" is over. Even with cellphone cameras everywhere, those "photographers" are taking themselves and their friends. If one of them started to photograph a stranger, they'd freak. I think also a woman with a camera can't melt into the background the way a man can...
I anyway tried one of those right-angle lenses, which was impossible. The zoom lens is probably the best option, tho too heavy for me to carry everywhere, every day (and, OK, I admit it -- I'm hooked on digital, & if there's a zoom for digital, the whole setup would weigh practically as much as I do).
I'll add, tho, that crowds (as on Halloween in the subway, or Gay Pride Day, etc.) are no problem... One of the reasons I was hooked on Times Square (300 rolls in the late '80s) was crowds of crowds and everyone with a camera. But, again, your scene with the guy in white hair, hand on chin at the cafe, would still be impossible. (And forget Times Square -- it's awful now.)
Most of the time a fairly -rather cheep- zoomlens 18 to 200 mm.
My other question is about the cover image, "Max" (tricolor gum). If I remember correctly that's... a grandchild? (Exquisite head in solemn soulful portrait.) What I want to know, Henk, is how did you figure the cropping -- in that black surround. Did it just "happen," did you try other ways, or...? (And what did you promise or threaten the kid to get that look?)
This one is not cropped , the black is just Photoshop CANVAS SIZE with black.
And yes , 'my botticelli' is my grandchild, and ' sitting' for me -not too long !- wasn't a problem until now. No 'promise' for the look, just love :-), but maybe i have to tell a short story:
When he was a baby, he had a cold, and he was too young to express his feelings in words; in pain he only could cry.
But a holiday was planned in Spain, and we have to sit nearly 3 hours in a plane, and he really had severe problems with his ears; during this three hours he sat on my lap and i tried to comfort him . Since that time we have a bit of a special relation.
Which I suspect could have happened anyway.... (& didn't make the kid so gorgeous, either).
The inkjet pictures are in the making for brom(oil) and (tri)color gums for my exhibition in the OpenShutter gallery in Durango in november; also some pictures taken in Istanbul (where i really want to go back!!)
We had the Atlas out this evening to find "Burma" -- so I checked "Durango" -- there's one in Colorado and one in Mexico. Tho this Atlas is ancient: 1963. Where's your "Durango"?
cheers,
Judy
|