From: Carl Weese (cweese@earthlink.net)
Date: 08/29/02-10:14:25 AM Z
> I do not believe I EVER took a picture of
> something I thought was "beautiful" & was happy with the result.
One of the dealers who handles my work once said that he understood my
pictures of beautiful things--the Connecticut woods and rivers, the hills of
western Virginia--but couldn't quite get his head around my pictures of ugly
things--corrugated metal buildings, abandoned drive-in movie theaters. He
was all the more puzzled when I explained that I only photograph things that
strike me as beautiful. In fact, that's all there is to it, I Iook for
beautiful things and photograph them. But my perception of beauty is quite a
bit more catholic, more inclusive, than his.
I also don't understand the business of view cameras being slow. Of course
they aren't as fast as a 35mm, but the notion that it takes hours to make a
photograph with a view camera is nonsense. When I teach view camera
technique I tell students that you should be able to see something from the
car at 70 mph (or while hiking with your gear in a packback) and be pulling
the darkslide within ninety seconds. They usually think I'm kidding, but I'm
not. (How do you get to use a view camera fast? Same way you get to Carnegie
Hall--practice!) When I spend a day out looking for pictures, I take forever
looking at things, deciding whether I want them or not. When the decision is
yes, I seldom spend more than a couple minutes making the picture whether
it's done with my 5x7 or my 12x20 or something in between. If I want to
respond to subjects _instantly_ I work with Leicas, but using a view camera
doesn't prevent you from working fast.
---Carl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:02:51 AM Z CST