RObert Budding
D'oh!
ywenz said:
One shooting style done really well seems like an accomplishment to me.
40 Years, 1 camera and 1 Lens
- Thread starter ch1
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 43
- Views 4K
One shooting style done really well seems like an accomplishment to me.
lubitel
Well-known
RObert Budding said:
I totally agree.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
The idea is good, however one needs a lot of commitment and selfcontrol to never ever buy and use a second piece of equipment.
Especially with lenses, having only one focal legth is, i agree, very helpful to make you used to that lens and use it at its best. But with a 28mm, i'd be angry at myself alot of times that i don't have anything longer when needed.
Same holds for a 50mm, many many times i feel i need stg wider. I'm talking about mundane stuff, not art - just going to a trip with some friends or such, when i bring a fixed-lens rf i often feel i missed a shot because of the limitations of the lens.
If i'd be self-confident enough, i could say what a great photographer said: there are no missed sphots. When i don't shoot, there are no pictures. Or stg like this.
Especially with lenses, having only one focal legth is, i agree, very helpful to make you used to that lens and use it at its best. But with a 28mm, i'd be angry at myself alot of times that i don't have anything longer when needed.
Same holds for a 50mm, many many times i feel i need stg wider. I'm talking about mundane stuff, not art - just going to a trip with some friends or such, when i bring a fixed-lens rf i often feel i missed a shot because of the limitations of the lens.
If i'd be self-confident enough, i could say what a great photographer said: there are no missed sphots. When i don't shoot, there are no pictures. Or stg like this.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
RJBender said:
Either you like his work or you don't. I wouldn't make blanket statements. No one questions HCB choice of focal length. Why question Henry Wessel's? Whatever fits their vision. For me as well, a 28mm is THE only lens, followed by a 21mm. To each their own.
If Henry uses the same camera for 40 consecutive years, it must have a wonderful patina by now.
Last edited:
ghost
Well-known
waste not, want not. :angel:
RJBender
RFF Sponsoring Member
kbg32 said:
Did I say I DIDN'T like Wessels's photos? From what I've read here on RFF, the 28mm focal length is not as popular as the 35mm. Too hard to see the framelines with glasses, too much angle of view etc.
R.J.
gns
Well-known
It doesn't seem the writer actually looked at Wessel's work since much of it over the past decade or more has been done in color (and I'll guess not with 35mm). So, while the statement about using only one camera and film might be close to the truth, it is not exactly accurate. But why should this be surprising or seem unusual anyway? Look at just about any of the great photographers through history. Atget, HCB, Frank, Winogrand, Arbus, Whomever. Does any of it seem to be the result of a bunch of varied equipment and processes? No, they all seem to have worked with pretty limited materials.
In the end though, this doesn't matter much. It's the pictures that count. And I have always liked Wessel's.
http://www.cowlesgallery.com/Wessel.html
Cheers
In the end though, this doesn't matter much. It's the pictures that count. And I have always liked Wessel's.
http://www.cowlesgallery.com/Wessel.html
Cheers
ywenz
Veteran
his photos are -yawn-
Sparrow
Veteran
ywenz said:
I imagine he thinks very highly of yours..
ywenz
Veteran
Sparrow said:
Haha, that's not the point. The purpose of the thread was to talk about this article on him. Then it evolved into how he's a master of 1 camera + 1 lens. I simply provided a counter point to that. Sparrow, why the added scarcasm?
SDK
Exposing since 1969.
If I could only have one lens it would be a 28mm, but I would have a hard time picking between the Biogon ZM or the Summicron-M ASPH. One camera only? Easy, that would be the M7 0.58X. One film, impossible. I shoot color mostly, and no one color film can be made to serve all purposes, like TriX can for B&W. I admire Wessel's economy and dedication, but I would have a hard time simplifying that much.
Last edited:
Sparrow
Veteran
ywenz said:
As you said the point seemed to be to discus the mans work, I too found it a bit repetitive but not enough to dismiss 40 years work with four words. My reply wasn’t intended to be sarcastic I was pointing out his inability to defend himself, sorry for any offence
Jerevan
Recycled User
I love the "Santa Barbara, Calif., 1977" and "Pico, Tasha" is also real nice. But it's hard to get a grip on a photographer in just five photos - would like to see more. (I saw the gallery link now) I am only beginning to understand what it means to "see" in a certain focal length - using 50 mm, most of the time.
The wideness of the 28, the DOF and how you can experiment with near-far relations is interesting. Wessel uses the 28 in these few photos mostly as a way to get people, dogs and things into a context, which in turn reminds me of how Winogrand (to take an example of someone else using 28 mm lenses) does exactly the opposite - he steps in, instead of standing further away. Two different techniques for the same focal length, but to me they show the versatility of the lens.
The wideness of the 28, the DOF and how you can experiment with near-far relations is interesting. Wessel uses the 28 in these few photos mostly as a way to get people, dogs and things into a context, which in turn reminds me of how Winogrand (to take an example of someone else using 28 mm lenses) does exactly the opposite - he steps in, instead of standing further away. Two different techniques for the same focal length, but to me they show the versatility of the lens.
f/stopblues
photo loner
I love the quote the article closes with..
"The process of photographing is a pleasure: eyes open, receptive, sensing, and at some point, connecting. It's thrilling to be outside your mind, your eyes far ahead of your thoughts."
That's so money 😎
"The process of photographing is a pleasure: eyes open, receptive, sensing, and at some point, connecting. It's thrilling to be outside your mind, your eyes far ahead of your thoughts."
That's so money 😎
gns
Well-known
Quote:[The wideness of the 28, the DOF and how you can experiment with near-far relations is interesting. Wessel uses the 28 in these few photos mostly as a way to get people, dogs and things into a context, which in turn reminds me of how Winogrand (to take an example of someone else using 28 mm lenses) does exactly the opposite - he steps in, instead of standing further away. Two different techniques for the same focal length, but to me they show the versatility of the lens.]
Jerevan, I think that's a pretty good observation.
__________________
Jerevan, I think that's a pretty good observation.
__________________
S
Simon Larbalestier
Guest
George, thanks for the HU on this
For me, it's inspiring to read the importance now being attributed to b/w work.
For me, it's inspiring to read the importance now being attributed to b/w work.
amateriat
We're all light!
Good article, lots of great photos (lots of good stuff on the linked site that, IMO, holds up to the article).
Yes, it turns out that 28mm is my favorite focal length as well: one Hexar has the 28 taking essentially permanent residence on its mount, while my GR1 got a lot of use before it got wrecked (it's getting fixed now); the zoom on my Konica Lexio 70 stays parked at 28mm most of the time (albeit with more obvious distortion than the others). It's a focal length that can do amazing things in experienced hands, but can also do awful stuff if you're not careful, which is why, as I mentioned in another thread, 35mm is a more popular focal length, IMO. (That, and the fact that good and not-too-pricey 35s have been around before 28s were, and the latter are still more expensive).
But I guess the bigger argument here is about how one defines "simplicity". Photographically speaking, I sure as hell can't always define it for myself, never mind coming up with a concept half of you out here could roughly agree with. Sometimes I go out with just one camera and lens and a few rolls and I'm Capt. Happy. Sometimes it's two cameras. Sometimes one of the little ones gets tucked in a pocket for the ride as well. Depends on how simple-minded I care to be on a given day (photographically speaking, although a few friends say it doesn't stop there).😉
One "simple" formula that has worked like gangbisters for me is having boiled my "working" camera system down to the point where at least 95% of the whole shebang fits within the confines of my Domke 803, and usually stays in there, ready for action. Sanest move I ever made. Two bodies, three lenses, two flash units if I need them, pocket tripod, film, and whatever else I might think I need is just there, ready to grab if I think I need all of it. No more stovepipe zooms or cumbersome bolt-on accessories. No more drawers and closets of stuff to decide on taking or not taking with me. And, have moicy, no more "S#!%, I knew I shoulda brought that with me" epiphanies seconds after boarding that train/plane to Some Place Interesting.
The "simplicity" here is relative; its creative and emotive/calming effects are anything but. 🙂
- Barrett
Yes, it turns out that 28mm is my favorite focal length as well: one Hexar has the 28 taking essentially permanent residence on its mount, while my GR1 got a lot of use before it got wrecked (it's getting fixed now); the zoom on my Konica Lexio 70 stays parked at 28mm most of the time (albeit with more obvious distortion than the others). It's a focal length that can do amazing things in experienced hands, but can also do awful stuff if you're not careful, which is why, as I mentioned in another thread, 35mm is a more popular focal length, IMO. (That, and the fact that good and not-too-pricey 35s have been around before 28s were, and the latter are still more expensive).
But I guess the bigger argument here is about how one defines "simplicity". Photographically speaking, I sure as hell can't always define it for myself, never mind coming up with a concept half of you out here could roughly agree with. Sometimes I go out with just one camera and lens and a few rolls and I'm Capt. Happy. Sometimes it's two cameras. Sometimes one of the little ones gets tucked in a pocket for the ride as well. Depends on how simple-minded I care to be on a given day (photographically speaking, although a few friends say it doesn't stop there).😉
One "simple" formula that has worked like gangbisters for me is having boiled my "working" camera system down to the point where at least 95% of the whole shebang fits within the confines of my Domke 803, and usually stays in there, ready for action. Sanest move I ever made. Two bodies, three lenses, two flash units if I need them, pocket tripod, film, and whatever else I might think I need is just there, ready to grab if I think I need all of it. No more stovepipe zooms or cumbersome bolt-on accessories. No more drawers and closets of stuff to decide on taking or not taking with me. And, have moicy, no more "S#!%, I knew I shoulda brought that with me" epiphanies seconds after boarding that train/plane to Some Place Interesting.
The "simplicity" here is relative; its creative and emotive/calming effects are anything but. 🙂
- Barrett
Last edited:
M
Magnus
Guest
Seen it, know the guy personally...
I try to follow his example, I try to use the 50 which I do in 95% of the cases. As for film, I always carry 2 bodies, one with highspeed, and one with low speed film. And then the final choice of the 50 is hard too. I like the collapsible summicron for tri-x, but also the last summi version for 50 delta or 25 efke .... but 50 it is ....
I try to follow his example, I try to use the 50 which I do in 95% of the cases. As for film, I always carry 2 bodies, one with highspeed, and one with low speed film. And then the final choice of the 50 is hard too. I like the collapsible summicron for tri-x, but also the last summi version for 50 delta or 25 efke .... but 50 it is ....
RJBender
RFF Sponsoring Member
sf
Veteran
RJBender said:What's up with these "Real Estate images"? LINK
I've seen better photos in the local free newspaper.
R.J.
There's decent money in that if you hook yourself up with a couple local offices. Of course, now EVERYONE'S a photographer with their little Powershot. I used to make a little money shooting houses for sale, till the office bought a digicam and never looked back.
Similar threads
