Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 35mm vs. 6x7??? - vs 4x5

Subject: Re: [OM] 35mm vs. 6x7??? - vs 4x5
From: "Walt Wayman" <hiwayman@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:41:14 -0500
You worked with Karsh?  Wow.  I am getting a bit green -- must be 
the envy.  I've got the book "Karsh, A Fifty-Year Retrospective" 
from the New York Graphic Society.  Anytime I think I'm getting 
really good, I put my meager accomplishments in the proper 
perspective by thumbing through either this or one of the Ansel 
Adams books.  Although all my large format equipment is long gone, 
I've still got eight old 6x9 cameras and 18 lenses, from 47 to 
270mm, so I haven't completely lost touch with working slowly and 
deliberately.  After schlepping the gear around, working slowly 
lets you catch your breath and rest your back.

Walt Wayman

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date:  Fri, 11 Jan 2002 09:48:45 -0500

---SNIP---

>When I worked with Yousuf Karsh, 4x5 was considered the miniature 
>format, as most of his portraits were done with an 8x10 camera. 
>Much easier to retouch invisibly, but heavier to carry. So he had 
>the ultimate accessory, an assistant.
>
>tOM
 


 
                   

< 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 >


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