R
ruben
Guest
As I read more about Kievs from Maizenberg's book, I naturally find likes and dislikes. His way of adjusting the yellow patch coincidence, for example, is very alilke to that of Russ Pinchbeck, altough not fully alike, somewhat more different from mine, and directly clashes with Rick Oleson's way.
Now, I am not going to enter into details about the specific controversies, but something much more important in my view, for all of us to take into account:
How are we going to regard Maizenberg's way when it differs from our opinions ?
On one hand, according to the addendum at the end of the English version, Maizenberg wrote 11 books on Russian cameras, 200 articles, and had 40 years of practical fixing experience. WOW !
This may prompt us to regard his Kiev chapter as more than highly authoritative, but perhaps as the Kiev Gospel. Who can argue against The Gospel ?
But there is another side to the coin. At the time he wrote his book, at the early sixties, Kievs were relatively young cameras. He didn't had the chance to buy from eBay, or getting otherwise a 40 years old Kiev. Thus for exmple the issue of frame spacing is almost overlapped. This is one thing.
Another thing is the evident fact that at the time the book was written, Maizenberg couldn't be part of the general technical evolution in the 50 consecutive years since then, with all the new materials we can enjoy today.
Lastly I will mention another psychological factor of importance. We humans are always looking for "fathers" to lead us into the unknown, and hence our tendency to exaggerate the qualities we find in others at the same time we downplay ourselves. This tendency being even older than Greek paghanism.
No doubt at all, Maizenberg's book is a gem, and a source of unique findings. But not the gospel, nor overweighting our common sense.
Cheers,
Ruben
Now, I am not going to enter into details about the specific controversies, but something much more important in my view, for all of us to take into account:
How are we going to regard Maizenberg's way when it differs from our opinions ?
On one hand, according to the addendum at the end of the English version, Maizenberg wrote 11 books on Russian cameras, 200 articles, and had 40 years of practical fixing experience. WOW !
This may prompt us to regard his Kiev chapter as more than highly authoritative, but perhaps as the Kiev Gospel. Who can argue against The Gospel ?
But there is another side to the coin. At the time he wrote his book, at the early sixties, Kievs were relatively young cameras. He didn't had the chance to buy from eBay, or getting otherwise a 40 years old Kiev. Thus for exmple the issue of frame spacing is almost overlapped. This is one thing.
Another thing is the evident fact that at the time the book was written, Maizenberg couldn't be part of the general technical evolution in the 50 consecutive years since then, with all the new materials we can enjoy today.
Lastly I will mention another psychological factor of importance. We humans are always looking for "fathers" to lead us into the unknown, and hence our tendency to exaggerate the qualities we find in others at the same time we downplay ourselves. This tendency being even older than Greek paghanism.
No doubt at all, Maizenberg's book is a gem, and a source of unique findings. But not the gospel, nor overweighting our common sense.
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator: