My Ultimate Shot with Fuji GSW 690 and why I would use it again in the digital age!!!

[dazedgonebye]

It's disturbing when people, like one of our candidates, want us to forget that we were in Vietnam specifically to kill patriots.

Wow...I missed the OP's political statement entirely! Somehow, I thought he was sharing an image he was proud of and making a statement on gear.
Thanks ever so much for ensuring another thread has to go down the tubes over a political issue. I was afraid for awhile there that we'd have to talk about photography.
:bang:

 

[furcafe]

I also must have missed the OP's political stance. Seems awfully condescending to assume that he isn't aware of the "bigger story." Also, while the North Vietnamese were certainly nationalists ("patriots"), I seem to recall that the U.S. forces were fighting in support of equally patriotic non-Communist Vietnamese (& non-Vietnamese in the case of the Hmong & other hill tribes).

I do agree that OP's conclusion about equipment isn't entirely supported by his excellent photo.

Originally Posted by JTK View Post

It's disturbing when people, like one of our candidates, want us to forget that we were in Vietnam specifically to kill patriots.

Wow...I missed the OP's political statement entirely! Somehow, I thought he was sharing an image he was proud of and making a statement on gear.
Thanks ever so much for ensuring another thread has to go down the tubes over a political issue. I was afraid for awhile there that we'd have to talk about photography.
:bang:

 

[robertdfeinman]

brands

brands

Do you know what sort of paintbrushes Rembrandt used? Does it matter?

If the photographer thinks he needs a certain combination of film, camera and processing, than that's what he needs.

Why the need by others to justify their choices? Perhaps you could duplicate the shot using your present setup. So what. He said he couldn't and that's what matters to him.

I realize that much of this site is devoted to equipment, but there is a difference between advice and relating experience and proselytizing. This is all part of the greater issue in modern society of being defined by one's consumer choices. Get over it. We love you for who you are, not the brands you buy.

 

[JTK]

"...while the North Vietnamese were certainly nationalists ("patriots"), I seem to recall that the U.S. forces were fighting in support of equally patriotic non-Communist Vietnamese (& non-Vietnamese in the case of the Hmong & other hill tribes)."

1) It's weird to photograph the Memorial without remembering that it's significant beyond our dead. Our beloved right wing opposed that monument because it wasn't sufficiently glorious.

2) Hmong were employed by us (CIA), we weren't there to defend them, and we weren't there for them when we fled. Do they have a monument?

3) "South Vietnam" was invented by the US and run by a dictatorship we selected. Same as Iran in that era, and by the same people, fyi.

I apologize for talking about more than gizmos.

 

[JTK]

"...while the North Vietnamese were certainly nationalists ("patriots")... the U.S. forces were fighting in support of equally patriotic non-Communist Vietnamese (& non-Vietnamese in the case of the Hmong & other hill tribes)."

1) It's weird to photograph the Memorial without remembering that it's significant beyond our dead. Our beloved right wing opposed that monument because it wasn't sufficiently glorious.

2) Hmong were employed by us (CIA), we weren't there to defend them, and we weren't there for them when we fled. Do they have a monument?

3) "South Vietnam" was invented by the US and run by a dictatorship we selected. Same as Iran in that era, and by the same people, fyi.

I apologize for talking about more than gizmos and buying...

 

[furcafe]

(1) Not weird @ all. It's an American memorial for American servicemen & women, not those they fought. I believe this is characteristic of every war memorial in every country. The Vietnamese have many, many monuments to their dead (@ least those who fought for the North) &, because they won, don't seem to be as bitter about it as the folks seem to be in the U.S. I agree that objections to Lin's design were wrong & overblown (as many today acknowledge), but it wasn't just right-wingers who thought it wasn't "sufficiently glorious." There were many people who opposed it because they simply didn't like modern/abstract art & didn't "get it." Again, I see nothing in the OP's post that indicates that he's some right-wing nut.

(2) The Hmong & other tribes were opposed to the Communists anyway, regardless of whether the U.S. supported them. It is indeed shameful that they were abandoned & they deserve a monument, too.

(3) South Vietnam may have been an "invention" (I would prefer "puppet") of the U.S. (actually more like the French), but the fact remains that it represented many millions of Vietnamese (because nationwide elections were never held, we'll never know how great a percentage) who did not want to be ruled by North Vietnam, which, FYI, was/is a true Marxist-Leninist dictatorship, just 1 that proved to be more disciplined, brutal, & ruthless. As far as Iran goes, yes, the Shah was bad, but just look @ who replaced him.

"...while the North Vietnamese were certainly nationalists ("patriots")... the U.S. forces were fighting in support of equally patriotic non-Communist Vietnamese (& non-Vietnamese in the case of the Hmong & other hill tribes)."

1) It's weird to photograph the Memorial without remembering that it's significant beyond our dead. Our beloved right wing opposed that monument because it wasn't sufficiently glorious.

2) Hmong were employed by us (CIA), we weren't there to defend them, and we weren't there for them when we fled. Do they have a monument?

3) "South Vietnam" was invented by the US and run by a dictatorship we selected. Same as Iran in that era, and by the same people, fyi.

I apologize for talking about more than gizmos and buying...

 

[Rayt]

>As far as Iran goes, yes, the Shah was bad, but just look @ who replaced him.

Chris, Its the chicken and the egg question. If during the Shah era the US had embraced democracy and basic human rights in Iran and the region then radicalism would not have emerged. Instead we turned a blind eye to torture and murder by the puppet government. Same story goes for much of SE Asia during the Cold War and South America decades before. So what happened after that? We embraced the "my enemy's enemy is my friend" policy and went to bed with Saddam, playing the Sunni and Shiite rivalry card.

 

[gb hill]

You guys got to remember you are viewing a 74.1 kb image. Alot of the resolution from the 6x9 image is lost. Enlarged there is no way a digital camera with a sensor smaller than, or even a full frame 24x36 will compare to it. The OP is right.

 

[furcafe]

You're right. I'm by no means a diehard supporter of every foreign policy action taken by the U.S. during the Cold War (or the current "war" on terror for that matter), nor am I blind to the various human rights abuses tolerated, aided, & abetted by the U.S. over the years. However, I think it's seriously naive to think that everything bad that happened in Iran, Guatemala, Chile, Vietnam, etc. was the direct & inexorable consequence of Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., et al. For example, I would posit that South Korea stands as an alternative to Vietnam; we supported a series of very repressive civilian & military dictators there, but I think it's clear that today's S. Koreans are better off than they would have been under North Korean rule. This is not to say that the U.S. intervention in Vietnam was ultimately the right decision, only that it wasn't simply an exercise in American imperialism & that the North Vietnamese were hardly warm & fuzzy "patriots" (that view reminds me of those back in the '60s & '70s who believed that the Chinese Communists were less brutal than the Soviets).

I concede that Iran is much more problematic & difficult to justify, though I personally think Mosaddeq would have ended up being replaced by someone like Nasser & Iran would have eventually gone Islamic or still be in the grip of a secular dictatorship like Egypt. I would also agree that most U.S. interventions in Latin America have been counterproductive to the cause of democracy.

>As far as Iran goes, yes, the Shah was bad, but just look @ who replaced him.

Chris, Its the chicken and the egg question. If during the Shah era the US had embraced democracy and basic human rights in Iran and the region then radicalism would not have emerged. Instead we turned a blind eye to torture and murder by the puppet government. Same story goes for much of SE Asia during the Cold War and South America decades before. So what happened after that? We embraced the "my enemy's enemy is my friend" policy and went to bed with Saddam, playing the Sunni and Shiite rivalry card.

 

[eleskin]

Detail from my "Hand on the Wall" shot

Detail from my "Hand on the Wall" shot

Just thought I would show a small section of this photo to show the detail. Note this is JPEG. Original is a TIFF.

 

[furcafe]

Excellent. Do you remember what aperture you used?

BTW, I apologize for extending the off-topic political discussion, but as you probably know, it can be tough for us DC folks to resist that sort of thing 😉

Just thought I would show a small section of this photo to show the detail. Note this is JPEG. Original is a TIFF.

 

[jan normandale]

FWIW, here's a similar 'clip' from a shot of Bethlehem Steel and the original. The bottom image is a 'cut' from the top image. Look to the right of the smelters to see the gasblowing engine room, the lower image is of that part of the shot. The camera was a Fuji BL G690 w a 100 mm lens. You can actually see the mullions in the windows of the building in the cut section which aren't readily visible in the top image.

 

[jan normandale]

Jens, I'm currently thinking of joining a photography co-op here in Toronto. They have an Imacon scanner as well as a colour darkroom and inkjets. Digital is for production people with deadlines and I understand that.

I still like film because it is affordable way to secure a high quality image. I don't have the $$ to put down for the, latest, highest and best digital cameras. Maybe in 10 years but not now, so this works well for me as it obviously did for eleskin's defining shot and your work at your site.

 

[oftheherd]

...

All of those people who dare to doubt that the EBC Fujinons lenses are second choice never have seen a slide or print made with that tool.
...

QUOTE]

You sir, are obviously a smart and experienced photographer. 😉

I have been a fan of Fujinon lenses (albeit in 35mm format) ever since acquiring a Fujica ST 901. All I have are the 50mm f/1.4, the 28mm, the 135mm, and the macro 50mm. But what nice glass. I can only imagine what a Fuji 6x9 or LF glass will produce.

As to the start of the thread, the OP has a nice photo. I like it.

Mostly I think the Wall speaks for itself. Most photos or paintings can't do too much to enhance it.

There is a painting I like however, which shows an older adult with his hand on the wall, apparently close to a particular name. Reflected, is a GI in battledress and in Vietnam, as I recall, with other less distinct GIs in the background. The GI has his hand appearing to touch the "real" person. That painting talks to me.

For a personal perspective, I had some reservations when I heard about the choosing of the design. I wanted something worthwhile as a Vietnam memorial. When I first saw it, I understood. I think nothing could have been better.

It is so powerful, even in contemplation, that I know veterans of Vietnam that refuse to go see it. Not because they don't like the idea of the design, but because they know how powerful it is, and are afraid they aren't ready for it. What better compliment to the design.

My perspective of the political statements here is that one should not forget, countries have a right to defend themselves. That is covered in Politics 101. The further that can be done from their own borders, the better. I can assure you I would not like to see what went on in Vietnam happening in my country. Could we have done things better there? I expect so! But it is naive to think that the North Vietnamese were angels. They were not. Nor were the southern communists. If you want to condemn wrong, go for it. But give everybody their share.

Away from all that, as I said, I like the photo the OP shared with us. I personally agree that no digital can compete with a Fujinon and MF film. Someday maybe, but not yet. That is my personal opinion based on using Fujinons in 35mm, and using other cameras that are MF. My opinion only, but snipe away if you wish. 😀 😀