Summilux 35mm pre-asph photos

And just for a little context and variety, my friend who set up the shoot and invited me along. I wouldn't normally post this behind the scenes shot but maybe it'll give someone more info about how this lens reacts in a more normal color context -- probably my least favorite use of this lens, outdoors in kinda broad, diffuse, flat light.



Another bts shot. B&w seems more natural to me for this nice lens.




EDIT: Photos deleted 11-12-21 at 03:30 by me (brusby) thanks to being shown the error of my tasteless ways by Helen Hill, Godfrey and DWF. I'd have to be a masochist to continue to post here.
 
Oh Fun, now we are turning into 'Playboy' & 'Hustler'....
Thankfully I don't have to see any of You masterbating behind their screen , rolls eyes, lol
 
I expected some intolerance for a different artistic version than what I see typically around here, but kind of surprised it's coming from you, Helen. Do you have the same kind of criticism for nudity in artwork found in many if not most of the major museums worldwide?
 
brusby said:
I expected some intolerance for a different artistic version than what I see typically around here, but kind of surprised it's coming from you, Helen. Do you have the same kind of criticism for nudity in artwork found in many if not most of the major museums worldwide?
Click to expand...

Silly, I have not flagged the photo or complained to anyone
or asking them to be taken down

Just my opinion... as one of the few women on this forum ,
Am i not allowed an opinion

Have I hit a male sore spot with You, certainly we can have different thoughts and still be friends , relate...not into 'cancel culture'

Yes Nudity can be quite brilliantly Photographically depicted and Artistic.:
Jean Loupe Sieff,
Bill Brandt / Nudes (one of my favorite of his books)
Mapplethorpe
Peter Lindbergh
etc

just found two photos a tad hint of Trash more than Art

Regarding Museums, the sculptures of 'David' and those of 'Venus' are quite breathtaking
 
  • Like
Reactions: DwF
Excuse me, Helen, but you are complaining to everyone publicly.

I don't recall anyone trying to say you're not entitled to your opinion. If you believe differently, please show me where that occurred.

But, I find your reference to masturbation frankly coarse, crass and intolerant, not to mention very puritanical. I support your right to have an opinion and also my right to be critical of it if I find it myopic and small minded.

Would you be kind enough to tell me exactly how my photos are more trash than art? Details would be welcome. Perhaps I can learn from your superior expertise in these matters.
 
brusby said:
Excuse me, Helen, but you are complaining to everyone publicly.

I don't recall anyone trying to say you're not entitled to your opinion. If you believe differently, please show me where that occurred.

But, I find your reference to masturbation frankly coarse, crass and intolerant, not to mention very puritanical. I support your right to have an opinion and also my right to be critical of it if I find it myopic and small minded.

Would you be kind enough to tell me exactly how my photos are more trash than art? Details would be welcome. Perhaps I can learn from your superior expertise in these matters.
Click to expand...

I am not complaining, just thinking out loud and again I have not flagged the photos nor asked they be taken down !!

Perhaps You have a problem with the word "masterbating'
Everyone has done it once or twice, maybe some even more
It''s a human quality... giggles

and as for You challenging my opinion
Why should my opinion upset you so...
I only said : "two photos seemed a tad more Trash than Art"
and I still feel that way

'Art' is a word that means different things to us all.

The nude model peering out the window is Beautifully photographed
YES that one is ART for me

Photos two and four seem to be more 'objectifying women'
more so the male voyeur /photographer ( Is that You shooting ? )
seems more mundane like a Playboy , Hustler shoot than ART

If You do not like my opinion, there is nothing more I can say
BUT in Life when You make something 'Public'
one must learn to accept people's feedback even if You disagree

What is that motto: Any Publicity is Good publicity. Just be Happy people are commenting ;)
 
Eh?

I think you rendered the B&W rather nicely, with good skin tones, etc. I don't find much of art in the posing of the model or the feel of the photos; the poses are too cliché and the feel is definitely on the soft porn side of the fence. The only photo in the ones posted that the model looks appealing to me is the one where you and she are clothed and smiling ... that seems a genuine photograph, not something that is trying to be "sexy by force."

Such photos don't bother me, they just don't interest me much. I'm gay, and I've seen plenty of gay porn of a similar nature: I have the same reaction to that. Truly appealing, sexy photographs of nudes either male or female are few and far between.

I do think Helen's reaction was a bit over the top, but again ... eh?

G
 
helenhill said:
Perhaps You have a problem with the word "masterbating'
Everyone has done it once or twice, maybe some even more
It''s a human quality... giggles

and as for You challenging my opinion
Why should my opinion upset you so...
I only said two photos "seemed a tad more trash than art"
and I still feel that way

'Art' is a word that means different things to us all.

The nude model peering out the window is Beautifully photographed
YES that one is ART for me

Photos two and four seem to be more 'objectifying women'
more so the male voyeur /photographer ( Is that You shooting ? )
seems more mundane like a Playboy , Hustler shoot than ART

If You do not like my opinion, there is nothing more I can say
BUT in Life when. You make something 'Public'
one must learn to accept people's feedback even if You disagree

What is that motto: Any Publicity is Good publicity. Just be Happy people are commenting ;)
Click to expand...

I don't have any problem with the word masturbating nor would I have any problem with your criticisms if I'd asked for them. But I didn't. I have never and normally would never criticize your choices in a public forum as you've chosen to do with mine. You have every right to do so. But it's not a matter of your right to criticize, it's just a matter of having the good taste and civility to refrain from attacking someone else's work or lack of those characteristics in my opinion.

It seems you think the defining distinction between art and porn is whether people masturbate to it? Well, if you think people don't masturbate to the art work by the artists you referenced above - Jean Loupe Sieff, Bill Brandt, Mapplethorpe, Peter Lindbergh etc -- you are denying reality. So if there's no real difference in that regard between reactions to their work and what you perceive as likely reactions to mine, why would you even mention it except to be cute or provocative?

And perhaps you can explain to me exactly what "objectifying women" means and how some nude photos of women do it and some don't. I'm really curious where you find the dividing line. If you think there's not some prurient or underlying sexual interest involved in almost all nude work, whether modern or from the earliest classic paintings and sculpture, I think you either don't understand the true range of the artists' motivations or you are are deceiving yourself.
 
oh dear, It seems You are so heated under the collar
and I'm not the least bit enflamed...

You accuse me of criticizing but I was just more talking aloud...
You beg to differ, and that's fine

Don't put things up on a public forum if You are only interested in complete Adoration....

Don't forget during the 1960';s - 1980's Playboy and Hustler had a HUGE following so there were lots of fans, You need not worry about being 'liked'.

the term 'objectifying':
Reducing 'women' / model to objects of sexual pleasure and gratification... which we see so much of in standard 'nude' photography

You may see your photos in 'that particular post' as Art,
I do not (though the nude looking out window was exquisite.)
for me it was mundane, typical norm of countless nude photos in the world of nude woman shot by male photographer.

Raise the stakes...let that 35 pre asph Summilux show it's ethereal, atmospheric allure with the nude

As for the term Art , it's all rather subjective, more so in the Modern World.
 
If anyone is objectifying women, it's you with your constant playing of the gender card. Lets be VERY CLEAR. I made no reference whatsoever to your gender or to treating you any differently than I would anyone else. Frankly I don't care whether you are male, female, plant, animal, animate or inanimate. I treat all people the same. But you've played the "woman" card multiple times here already with your references to: "as one of the few women on this forum", "Have I hit a male sore spot" "Photos two and four seem to be more 'objectifying women'".

It's cheap, tadry and in very poor taste. In my opinion it degrades all women, much more than any photos you interpret as playboy'esque.

Why would anyone in his or her right mind want to get involved in any way with someone who is going to play the gender card on them?

But if that's the best argument you have, fire away. You've been unable or unwilling to define for me the dividing line between art and porn while continuing to suggest or imply my work is somehow substandard in your view. I frankly could care less about your opinion. I'm just probing to see if you can actually articulate a clear distinction or whether it's just whatever you fancy at the time. It's clear to me now that it's the latter.

You've at least acknowledged art is "all rather subjective". But with that in mind, why would you be so egocentric and have such a sense of self importance that you'd think others should hear your opinion?

You said "You accuse me of criticizing but I was just more talking aloud". Well you're the only person I know whose "talking aloud" makes it into print on this forum. I hope you see the absurdity of your statements.
 
Well if you had seduced me as viewer with something more Atmospheric than the typical norm
I would be pleased

So what of my thoughts
all You do is keep insisting I 'see' it your way

What is the big deal if I am not a fan of a few photos of one particular set... It's a BIG world, go out and conquer
Cheers ~
 
helenhill said:
all You do is keep insisting I 'see' it your way
Click to expand...

That's not true and is just another distortion of the facts. Please show me where I insisted you see it my way. You can't because i didn't

I absolutely don't care how you see it. I just am not interested in hearing your opinion about how you see it.

Or don't you understand the distinction?
 
brusby said:
That's not true and is just another distortion of the facts. Please show me where I insisted you see it my way. You can't because i didn't

I absolutely don't care how you see it. I just am not interested in hearing your opinion about how you see it.

Or don't you understand the distinction?
Click to expand...

If You do not care how I see it nor Interested in my Opinion
Thats all good and Fine
Then stop pestering like a fly, buzzing all about..
You just choose to badger me because I posted my thoughts
Some in favour, some not of a few photos.

Putting Thoughts or Photos up on a Public Forum
are open to Dialogue...otherwise don't waste your Time posting

I tried to answer your questions, seemed to always displease You.
so just put me on your Ignore list

I have no Issues with You,
You seem to have venom if One does not agree with You
or does not see it your way.

Cheers & Best ~ HH
 
  • Like
Reactions: DwF
Godfrey said:
Eh?

I think you rendered the B&W rather nicely, with good skin tones, etc. I don't find much of art in the posing of the model or the feel of the photos; the poses are too cliché and the feel is definitely on the soft porn side of the fence. The only photo in the ones posted that the model looks appealing to me is the one where you and she are clothed and smiling ... that seems a genuine photograph, not something that is trying to be "sexy by force."

Such photos don't bother me, they just don't interest me much. I'm gay, and I've seen plenty of gay porn of a similar nature: I have the same reaction to that. Truly appealing, sexy photographs of nudes either male or female are few and far between.

I do think Helen's reaction was a bit over the top, but again ... eh?

G
Click to expand...

The original poster asked for example photos taken with this lens. He didn't ask for our most recent museum quality masterpieces.

I submitted some behind the scenes shots and a few other photos taken on my first outing with this lens. I find it odd that you and Helen see fit to criticize my examples for lacking artistic merit. Have you expressed the same kind of criticism for the dozens or even thousands of mundane pictures of brick walls, passengers doing nothing on subways and trains, and other innocuous photos offered as examples in this or other threads? And if not why would you single this one out?

I don't claim to possess any particular level of artistry. But I've seen so many times where people who are trying to create are driven away by these artistic assassins and vibe killers.

I can think of several very talented photographers who were driven away from this forum and the Fred Miranda form after being criticized by other forum members.

Rather than nurturing and encouraging those around us to produce more and to develop their creative visions, there seems to be a group of people who take pleasure in criticizing others and stifling creativity.

I just don't understand that mindset. Usually nothing is gained by it. It rarely seems to be an honest effort to help but more often a petty set of criticisms offered more to make the complainant feel good about his or her imagined superior skills than to assist the person who took the photograph.
 
brusby said:
The original poster asked for example photos taken with this lens. He didn't ask for our most recent museum quality masterpieces.
...
Click to expand...

If you post photographs, expect the occasional critique. I gave you my honest and objective critique of the photos you posted. I know that 90% of what I post is not of universal appeal ... yeah, those self-same graphic shots of bricks and pavement and such... and some people tell me how crappy/trivial/mundane/etc it is. "Thank you for responding." is the only valid response... and I actually mean it sincerely.

Posting nudes is often fraught because nudes are a sensitive subject matter in many cultures, even as example of the lens rendering qualities. Nudes have to be artful to not be seen as pornographic. Rob-F said he would "like to see more photos like that" or some such, with smiley faces that indicate it was a somewhat salacious intimation. I doubt he really meant for you to post nudes to the thread.

It is what it is. If you want to waste a lot of energy proclaiming your innocence, you will simply make it obvious that you are either clueless, or astonishingly naïve.

G
 
The goggles rangefinder of my early second version black 35mm summilux lens appears to be off a bit after being professionally adjusted a couple of years ago. I would like to take the lens on a trip in mid Jan. and do not know anyone in the US, especially with shipping delays, who can adjust one that fast.

Do people attempt to adjust this themselves? I do have an M10 to use to test, but have not worked on something like this before. Is it a difficult task for one inexperienced?
 
Godfrey said:
I gave you my honest and objective critique of the photos you posted.

[snip]

If you want to waste a lot of energy proclaiming your innocence, you will simply make it obvious that you are either clueless, or astonishingly naïve.

G
Click to expand...

I didn't ask for your critique. But you, like Helen seem to feel entitled to offer your unsolicited criticism.

Nice try trying to justify your belief that I deserved your criticism because the original poster included a smiley face when he asked for more photos like the first one I posted and/or that nudes deserve special handling. I've already given above my reasons why I think unsolicited criticism is toxic and not good for either this forum or the creative community as a whole.

As for proclaiming my innocence, I don't recall actually being accused of doing anything wrong with the possible exception of posting photos that you and Helen find lacking in taste. I never suggested my pictures were in good taste. In fact I'm sure I've got more than my share of clunkers.

But much more importantly, I question the lack of courtesy and the toxic affects of making unsolicited attacks. You seem to feel it's OK I disagree for the reasons stated above.

And now you suggest that I'd be "either clueless or astonishingly naïve" to "proclaim my innocence". Innocent of exactly what? Please tell me exactly what I'm being accused of doing.

But I do think it is petty and very small of you to suggest anyone would be "astonishing naïve and clueless" simply for responding to what you or others have posted about him or his work. I suppose you see another attack as your best defense.

We can end this now or go on forever. But if you think I'm gonna stop responding to your accusations simply because you call me names, you may want to reconsider.
 
brusby said:
I'm just responding to you Helen. It's you who started this.
Click to expand...


Helen's initial response to the selection of photos on display was honest, but polite and also instructive. I think we all know when posting here, we may receive praise, or critique! You prefaced your post "feel free to delete if too risqué" an indication that you might have expectation of a harsh response, perhaps in addition to praise.

Godfrey's "critique" was polite, well articulated and his characterization of the poses spot-on.

The character of the lens and glow, if that was the intent of your post, was in evidence in the first black and white of your model adorning the window. To the extent that your post was response to Rob-F's request (which felt tongue in cheek to me too), a link to your Flickr would have sufficed so that he or others could partake of the other images you posted there.


David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom