Erik van Straten
Veteran
Thank you very much, Leicapixie, your support is much appreciated!
Erik.
Erik.
Perceptol
- Thread starter Pete B
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 104
- Views 11K
Highway 61
Revisited
There are people with a gifted eye taking excellent photos and knowing what to do with their gear because they perfectly master it and know how to use it and when. This is why they are called experienced people, in general.
And there are people getting obsessed with lenses rendition, "bokeh" (something which didn't exist when I started with photography 40 years ago), optical aberrations - which lenses makers tried to solve out for decades and are now seen as lenses qualities or, more funny, "lenses signature" - and flare caused by the lens formula itself or haze due to outgassing of the old lubricants, which is now strangely praised as "glow".
This trend more or less came out of the blue when digital photography got adult and sent everybody back home because sensors are just unforgivable with bad lenses.
As a result some people still going on with film photography began to see it as a black magic and wanted to "experiment" with developers, film speed, old lenses, flare, spherical aberration (now called "swirly bokeh" and raved about), coma for night urban photography etc.
Sooner or later this stupid trend of looking at the lenses results not at the photographs hopefully will come to an end and good photographs taken by good photographers will remain over the pile while all those crappy attempts of being "artistic" using a questionable lens (generally wide open, because of some hype telling it's what to always do with a L**** lens) in front of a crappy film processed with the wrong developer at a dumb film speed (who would have been fool enough to develop Tri-X in Rodinal in the 1970s and 1980s for instance ?) will become "like tears in rain", just because those "photographs" are empty frames and don't record nor tell anything.
Yet, we all should be very careful not to belong to the wrong category of "photographers" - and this, all the time. It's so easy to get trapped.
And there are people getting obsessed with lenses rendition, "bokeh" (something which didn't exist when I started with photography 40 years ago), optical aberrations - which lenses makers tried to solve out for decades and are now seen as lenses qualities or, more funny, "lenses signature" - and flare caused by the lens formula itself or haze due to outgassing of the old lubricants, which is now strangely praised as "glow".
This trend more or less came out of the blue when digital photography got adult and sent everybody back home because sensors are just unforgivable with bad lenses.
As a result some people still going on with film photography began to see it as a black magic and wanted to "experiment" with developers, film speed, old lenses, flare, spherical aberration (now called "swirly bokeh" and raved about), coma for night urban photography etc.
Sooner or later this stupid trend of looking at the lenses results not at the photographs hopefully will come to an end and good photographs taken by good photographers will remain over the pile while all those crappy attempts of being "artistic" using a questionable lens (generally wide open, because of some hype telling it's what to always do with a L**** lens) in front of a crappy film processed with the wrong developer at a dumb film speed (who would have been fool enough to develop Tri-X in Rodinal in the 1970s and 1980s for instance ?) will become "like tears in rain", just because those "photographs" are empty frames and don't record nor tell anything.
Yet, we all should be very careful not to belong to the wrong category of "photographers" - and this, all the time. It's so easy to get trapped.
Flat Twin
Film Shooter
Perhaps I might add my two pennies worth as I have been mentioned above in post #146...
Erik and I have had an ongoing and what I believed to be, friendly and constructive disagreement over in the Leica 35 Summilux Pre Asph thread for over a year now, off and on. It is all there, in that thread, for all to see. At no point has there been any problem or aggravation and other members have also been involved and vocal too.
Two days ago, on Sunday, I posted two pictures to this thread (Perceptol), they are above for all to see. I noticed that Erik replied asking me whether I was still using his method for developing TMax400 in Perceptol. My reply is above for all to see, just below the two pictures... It is also possible to see that Erik has since deleted that first reply to the two pictures. My response still stands though, unedited. Other comments were then made by Erik of a quite frosty nature and I made a second reply to those comments, again above and for all to see.
I then noticed that Erik had deleted those comments too and instead had quoted a comment that I made three weeks ago in the aforementioned Summilux 35 thread, into this thread, completely out of context... There is also a rather unpleasant comment that is at this point still above for all to see, made by Erik.
Now then, the discussion in the Summilux 35 thread has never been unpleasant or insulting in any way. Other people have joined in the discussion and it has been lively as these things should be perhaps. My comment in that thread, #1616, was made three weeks ago and in that time neither Erik nor myself have made any contact either in public threads or privately until two days ago when I innocently posted two pictures into this thread. I find it very odd that a comment from another thread, made three weeks ago, should find it's way into this totally unrelated thread completely out of context...
If anyone is still following, to Erik I say this: Erik, if my last comment in the Summilux 35 thread has upset or insulted you then you have my apology. You and I have always got along just fine within this forum and your advice has been valuable to me at times. I happen to disagree with some of your views in the Summilux 35 thread, as do others and these people have also been vocal. Was I Kurt with my last reply in that thread, perhaps but was I rude or insulting, I really don't think so. I have seen a lot worse within these pages... Erik, perhaps we both need to just agree to disagree and get along in the interests of a pleasant and welcoming environment here at RFF?
To everyone reading this in bemusement I can only make an apology for what is my part in something that seems to have spilled over from another thread, totally out of context and has landed here...
Regards to all,
Simon
Erik and I have had an ongoing and what I believed to be, friendly and constructive disagreement over in the Leica 35 Summilux Pre Asph thread for over a year now, off and on. It is all there, in that thread, for all to see. At no point has there been any problem or aggravation and other members have also been involved and vocal too.
Two days ago, on Sunday, I posted two pictures to this thread (Perceptol), they are above for all to see. I noticed that Erik replied asking me whether I was still using his method for developing TMax400 in Perceptol. My reply is above for all to see, just below the two pictures... It is also possible to see that Erik has since deleted that first reply to the two pictures. My response still stands though, unedited. Other comments were then made by Erik of a quite frosty nature and I made a second reply to those comments, again above and for all to see.
I then noticed that Erik had deleted those comments too and instead had quoted a comment that I made three weeks ago in the aforementioned Summilux 35 thread, into this thread, completely out of context... There is also a rather unpleasant comment that is at this point still above for all to see, made by Erik.
Now then, the discussion in the Summilux 35 thread has never been unpleasant or insulting in any way. Other people have joined in the discussion and it has been lively as these things should be perhaps. My comment in that thread, #1616, was made three weeks ago and in that time neither Erik nor myself have made any contact either in public threads or privately until two days ago when I innocently posted two pictures into this thread. I find it very odd that a comment from another thread, made three weeks ago, should find it's way into this totally unrelated thread completely out of context...
If anyone is still following, to Erik I say this: Erik, if my last comment in the Summilux 35 thread has upset or insulted you then you have my apology. You and I have always got along just fine within this forum and your advice has been valuable to me at times. I happen to disagree with some of your views in the Summilux 35 thread, as do others and these people have also been vocal. Was I Kurt with my last reply in that thread, perhaps but was I rude or insulting, I really don't think so. I have seen a lot worse within these pages... Erik, perhaps we both need to just agree to disagree and get along in the interests of a pleasant and welcoming environment here at RFF?
To everyone reading this in bemusement I can only make an apology for what is my part in something that seems to have spilled over from another thread, totally out of context and has landed here...
Regards to all,
Simon
giulio stucchi
Well-known
Let's revive this thread with some photos.
Pentax K1000, smc 50 f2, t-max 100, perceptol
giulio
Pentax K1000, smc 50 f2, t-max 100, perceptol
giulio
CharlesDAMorgan
Veteran
Life of Riley. Leica M2, Cooke Amotal 2inch f2, Tmax400 at 200, Perceptol 1:2. Thanks to Erik, this is now my favourite film and developer combination of choice. At least while there's plenty of light around!
Similar threads
