I've been good with everything that is in the Prints for Sale section. If it's a negative, or a digital capture, I've got the source filed. That alone took me something like two months of incremental tedium. Now I get a request for a shot that hasn't been on the site for a long time: a little girl with her tongue out letting snow fall on it.
When did I shoot that? I don't have a clue. I remember where I was standing (the pharmacy was behind me. Corner of 2nd avenue and 80th street). But time is elusive. It couldn't have been this winter? No way. And it wasn't last winter.
So off I go on a merry chase. Did I shoot it digital? Film? I figure it was probably digital, but maybe not. I go through all the digital stuff from 2004 and 2005. Gadzooks, I shot a heck of a lot of digital in that overlapping year from July 2004 to July 2005. And so many shots that I can't figure out why? What in the hell was I thinking shooting the same thing over and over again. Definitely a hit and mostly miss feeling.
So now it's off to negative land. That's going to be an archeological dig for sure. There's no way around this sort of stuff. If the negative has been offered for sale, then I have it handy. But if it's just some bit that someone thinks of a couple of years later --
On the other hand, I almost always find something else worth a test print on these expeditions so it's not a total loss.
Anyway - how long do you think the Cheney stuff will last on the late night shows. I'm giving it a week unless he shoots someone else.
2/14/2006
Medium Format Epiphany
Ah. That was the cheapest way to get the medium format bug out of my system. I have to thank Matt for loaning me the Pentax 67 because I had an epiphany after using it.
Epiphany 1: only one camera can occupy a place in your heart at any one time.
The converse: if you are using the MF camera, then you are not using another camera (in this case my M3).
If you are out there going back and forth about medium format (ask yourself about your own style) and then borrow or rent the MF camera of your choice. See if that gets it out of your system or draws you in deeper. My own conclusion should have been fortold by the fact that over the years I've sold all my medium format equipment: Not for me. And no, it wasn't the Pentax 67 that pushed the epiphany button. Would have had same result with any MF camera.
And it's not only the camera.
I still get a better scan from a 35mm negative with a dedicated film scanner than from the Epson 4990. With the transparency scanner you've got two pieces of glass to keep clean. You've got problems with Newtons' rings (yes, once in a while even when using the supplied Epson carrier); you've got to keep the film flat. And of course not many shots on a roll which means changing rolls more often and more time developing to get an equivalent number of negatives.
Nah. Not for me.
Disclaimer: Your results may differ.
Anyway - the whole gestalt (did I spell the right?) totally turned me off.
Let's face it, I like the look, in fact I love the look of my Tri-x 35mm negative at 8 x 12 inches or cropped to 11 x 14.
So why does medium format come up at all... ? That is just the restless mind talking when it is bored. That is just (for me) a way of distracting myself. Someday that part of my mind is going to say, "hey wouldn't it be fun to shoot with the view camera again?" Please, keep reading this blog and if you ever see me going in that direction, remind me of my MF epiphany. Please, I beg you.
Epiphany 1: only one camera can occupy a place in your heart at any one time.
The converse: if you are using the MF camera, then you are not using another camera (in this case my M3).
If you are out there going back and forth about medium format (ask yourself about your own style) and then borrow or rent the MF camera of your choice. See if that gets it out of your system or draws you in deeper. My own conclusion should have been fortold by the fact that over the years I've sold all my medium format equipment: Not for me. And no, it wasn't the Pentax 67 that pushed the epiphany button. Would have had same result with any MF camera.
And it's not only the camera.
I still get a better scan from a 35mm negative with a dedicated film scanner than from the Epson 4990. With the transparency scanner you've got two pieces of glass to keep clean. You've got problems with Newtons' rings (yes, once in a while even when using the supplied Epson carrier); you've got to keep the film flat. And of course not many shots on a roll which means changing rolls more often and more time developing to get an equivalent number of negatives.
Nah. Not for me.
Disclaimer: Your results may differ.
Anyway - the whole gestalt (did I spell the right?) totally turned me off.
Let's face it, I like the look, in fact I love the look of my Tri-x 35mm negative at 8 x 12 inches or cropped to 11 x 14.
So why does medium format come up at all... ? That is just the restless mind talking when it is bored. That is just (for me) a way of distracting myself. Someday that part of my mind is going to say, "hey wouldn't it be fun to shoot with the view camera again?" Please, keep reading this blog and if you ever see me going in that direction, remind me of my MF epiphany. Please, I beg you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)