Wayne wrote: >Great project Ken. Good to see the results of putting a good
camera to
> work. I find street photography hard also, as I don't like invading peoples
> space, but I find, more often than not, people are willing. I think if they
> have
> pink hair or a tatoo, that might be a clue they want to be seen. The camera
> does make a difference in street photography.
>
I'm not one to put too much of an emphasis on "the equipment"... well,
sometimes, yes I do... but in this case I think the equipment actually had a
lot to do with it. The camera is very low-profile, is not black, and is
retro enough to put people in a different mood. Nobody likes to be
videotaped, and I've seen where digital cameras have put people on the
defensive like they have when a video camera is pointed their way. There are
many reasons why the venerable Leica M-series cameras are considered the
ultimate street photography camera. I'm personally beginning to discover
those reasons.
I've been watching and rewatching "The Genius of Photography" and am totally
fascinated watching Joel Meyerowitz. This guy is the "Tiger Woods" of
photography--somebody who's skills and abilities are something to admire and
attempt to attain. However, in reality, if Joel is the photographic
equivalent of Tiger Woods, I'm just some guy whacking balls at the driving
range. Every once in a while I can connect and hit the ball where I want,
but that does not make me Tiger.
> I also like the Domke straps, they are easy to wrap around the wrist.
>
This one mysteriously appeared with the camera. I'm not sure that was
intended or not, but it surely makes the OM-3Ti one of the most comfortable
cameras to carry. I bought the Tamron equivalent to the Domke and it seems
better suited for the heavier DSLR than the svelte OM camera. I do notice
how much softer and pliable the Domke strap is, which makes it wrap around
the wrist much easier.
A question about why the 50mm lens instead of the 35mm? The 35mm is usually
my "go to" lens and I was going to use it, but at the last moment
substituted with the macro because I wanted to stretch myself by using a
lens I don't usually use and since it was starting to precipitate, the
recessed lens elements of the 50mm meant I didn't need to use a lens-shade
to keep the lens dry. The lens shade would have made the camera appear
bigger, which is what I was trying not to do. The 35/2.8's front lens
element is right out there for all the rain, sleet and snow to stick to.
Years ago, I was photographing flowers in the rain when I ran into a
professional photographer working the same spot. She (I've forgotten her
name--this was 20 years ago) was using an OM system and had the 50 f3.5
macro lens. Knowing that this wasn't necessarily the best lens of the
system, asked her about it and she noted how the lens stayed dry in the
rain. A minor point, I know, as there are alternative ways to keep a lens
dry, but this has stayed with me through the years and several years ago I
acquired a 50 f3.5 macro and have experienced this advantage firsthand. The
50 f3.5 macro really is an unique lens in this regard.
The layering you have in the barber shot, especially the unintended
> part, is good.
Thank you. There are certain pictures which are kinda growing on me. One
ancient technique is to build layers. However, since I've been shooting
digital, this is one compositional technique which has been almost
completely forgot. The smaller viewfinders make layering so much harder to
do. Also, the deeper DoF and more squarish format doesn't help matters any.
Excuses, excuses...
Back to the "equipment thing" again... The camera does influence what and
how you shoot. This project was restricted to using the most modern
retro-camera available. Manual focus, manual exposure, manual
everything--even mechanical shutter. One common-as-dirt focal-length. I was
forcing myself to see what the camera saw, not make the camera fit my own
preconceived idea of how the picture should look. Sylvia Plachy, when asked
why she uses so many different types of cameras on a shoot says that each
camera sees the subject differently. In this particular instance, I allowed
myself to see the world the way an OM-3Ti equipped with a 50mm f3.5 Macro
lens with Fujicolor 100 print film sees it. Is the technology driving the
composition? Not necessarily, but the technology is presenting specific
compositional options which the photographer can choose to make use of. If
a painter has just spatulas and no brushes, he will make a painting that is
not like the one he'd make had he used a full set of brushes.
Will I repeat this experiment? Possibly, but next time I'll change the
rules. Different lens, different camera, different film--something
different. Maybe restrict myself to shooting only one handed with slow
shutter-speeds. The idea is to do something outside of the comfort-zone and
outside of what I normally do. This mini-project not only met and exceeded
my goals, but has opened up a tremendous discussion here on the list.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|