George A wrote:
>
>....rare is the large format user who doesn't also have a
>darkroom and agonize over getting the 'perfect interpretive print' from
>his original. Whereas 35mm folks are not so concerned about artistic
>interpretation, but rather they're about presenting the reality of the
>world to the viewer.
>Any thoughts?
I think it has to do with the *time* involved. 35mm is very much an
immediate format - the cameras (at least the OMs) are small and light and
quick to handle. 35mm users will often see a picture and shoot it more or
less immediately, capturing a moment Cartier-Bresson style. A 4x5 (or 5x4
as we perversely call them in England) requires very deliberate use, is
slow and cumbersome, and requires much thought and contemplation. That is a
more "artistic" process. Given that, it seems entirely reasonable that the
4x5 user would want to have complete control over the end product - the
print - and would likely regard it as an artwork. It's probably fair to
say that 35mm users mostly produce "record shots" rather than works of
art (though not exclusively). Of course, there are 4x5 users who produce
high quality record shots and there are 35mm users who produce works of art
:-)
>
>
>Second was a letter to editor by Michael Covington re the article naming
>OM system as 'Best kept secret.' Dr Covington says it ain't so, for the
>4Ti anyway, cause it hasn't enuf eye relief for him. He sold his 4 and
>longs for Oly to bring back the OM-1.
I noticed on a TV eclipse programme the other week that the camera on the
end of the telescope was an OM-*10* - which poses a question - does "B" on
an OM-10 require battery power or not? (OK, I realise you wouldn't want
much of a time exposure to photograph the sun!)
Cheers
Richard
Richard Ross
Hemel Hempstead, England
rhdesign@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|