The Online Photographer

Now That's a Tripod

Photographer, 1935, by Fred Stein

This delightful shot is from the website of Fred Stein (1909–1967), an early street photographer whose book Fred Stein: Paris New York I've talked about in these environs before. (At least I think I did. I meant to, anyway. Now I can't find it, because I can't find anything since I moved.)

I have a particular weakness for photographs of photographers, either portraits of famous names or photographers working.

I wonder how many people use tripods now? I'd do a poll, but I no longer know of a workable poll widget.

UPDATE: Here's our survey. Ed Eubanks set this up. Takes less than two minutes to fill out—tell us about yourself. Thanks, Ed!

More to the point, I wonder how many young twentysomething digital natives use tripods...I know some of you grizzled old Dektol-breathers use 'em. I went through the whole tripod-shopping thing a few years ago, and discovered, to my surprise at the time, that tripod technology has progressed by leaps and bounds since I entered photography. I bought the perfect up-to-the-moment modern tripod...which is now a thing of the past. The Gitzo GT2532 is the replacement for the GT2531 I bought. (And even more expensive than mine was.) I bought the long bed version of this head and like it very much, although I know that many people who use tripods in the field prefer ball heads.

However I never use it. Well, I sometimes use it. But seldomly, and probably a rackety old beat-up no-name camera-store tripod would do well enough for me.

I like Fred's picture, though, a lot.

Mike
(Thanks to Chris Skarbon)

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Chris Norris: "I just recently (well, a few months ago) finished shooting a project, all with a tripod, a perspective control lens, and a digital camera. Leaving my house every day with the tripod and the camera became a really great ritual for me. I've shot with a 4x5 before, but this daily shooting, processing, and printing really allowed me to nail my technique down. Plus I became really good at setting everything up in less than 15 seconds.

"The project is detailed here."

Mike replies: That's very nice work, Chris. I'd say you ought to keep that habit up.

Today's Google Doodle Celebrates Photo Pioneer Anna Atkins

If you go to Google today you'll see a delicate cyanotype photogram:

It celebrates the 216th anniversary of the birth of Anna Atkins, considered the earliest female photographer, and the first photographer to publish an entirely photographic book. The Washington Post explains here.

Only 20 copies of the book, titled Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions, still exist. You can see it in digital form at the British Library site. And here's a portrait of Anna, in 1861 at age 62.

Mike
(Thanks to John Winder)

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

John Linn: "It is interesting that, as abstract as the doodle is, it still reads (or implies) 'Google.'"

Olympus 17mm f/1.8 Lens / Crowdsource Review

"The only way to get to know a lens is to use it for a year.
Lens tests are just shortcuts."

—Unnamed Leica designer; quote could be apocryphal.

-

Here's the lens under discussion:

The Olympus 17mm ƒ/1.8. That's the B&H Photo link. Here it is from Amazon, and from Amazon UK, and here are our other links.

Here's what our readers who use this lens think of it:

[Pace Luke in the Comments section, note that the illustrations are merely to show what people use the lens for, not to provide evidence or proof of its technical optical properties. —Ed.]

Photo by Matti Sulanto

Matti Sulanto: "I got the lens because it is small, fast and it has just about my favourite angle of view. At the time it was also the only choice with AF.

"I use the 17mm when I need a small lens on my Olympus. It is also very simple and not very exciting, but I like that, and it never interferes with my shooting. Optically it is better than its reputation and I have shot many presentable photos with it. I use it mostly for street shooting or similar and most of the time the aperture is set around ƒ/4–5.6, but the relatively bright ƒ/1.8 maximum aperture makes it also really handy after-dark lens, especially with the excellent IBIS of Olympus."

Howard: "I love the lens. I use it on an E-M1. 35mm-equivalent is my favorite focal length. It's small and light. I prefer it to the 20mm Panasonic because I prefer the Olympus rendering and the autofocus is miles faster and quieter. Though I've read it's not as sharp as other options in this focal length—including the 12–40mm Olympus ƒ/2.8 zoom at 35mm-e, which I also own, or the Panasonic 20mm prime which I also own—I have never noticed lack of sharpness to be a problem—and I pixel peep.

"I'd prefer that it were ƒ/1.4, but then it would probably be quite a bit larger and would have other tradeoffs."

Rev. Heng Sure: "With the Olympus 17mm ƒ/1.8 Mounted on my Pen E-P5 I enter my Cartier-Bresson fantasy; I imagine my camera invisible while I merge into the background, capturing decisive moments."

Marc Gibeault: "One thing about this lens stand out for me: its price. I got it from Olympus Canada for CAN$349. So, along with the 45mm ƒ/1.8 and the 25mm ƒ/1.8 [both US$399 —Ed.], I have a trio of primes I wouldn't be able to get from any other system. There's no way I could rationalize more than $1,500 in lenses for one of my numerous hobbies...and the quality, as we'll see in the samples shown here, has nothing to be ashamed of."

Photo by Ståle Prestøy

Ståle Prestøy: "I'm a zoom user and have the M.Zuiko 12–40mm ƒ/2.8 and 40–150mm ƒ/2.8 PROs, which is more than sufficient focal range for me. But I've always wanted to find a decent, normal prime lens for stay-on lens for almost any casual photography.

"I've used 50mm-equivalent lenses both on film and digital cameras, but I never came to a point where this focal length became natural to me. Although I was very happy with bokeh and sharpness the field of view was too narrow and restricting. I also tried the 28mm focal length, and I've got much fun and nice memories from using it. But it soon became clear that it wasn't as versatile as I would have wanted. The wide angle characteristics became too restricting for me, so it too spent most of its time as a dust-gatherer on the shelf.

"Last year I found that it was time for taking a step up from 28mm and bought a 35mm-e in the shape of the M.Zuiko 17mm ƒ/1.8 (...OK, 34mm then  ;-)  ). I've been using this lens for some months now, mainly on an E-M10 but lately also with an E-M1.

"When some scene catches my eye and I look at it through the viewfinder and this lens, it feels very close to how it seemed like 'in real life.' Looking at the world through it feels like a normal framing for my eyesight—and that's the beauty of the lens for me. Of course, the fact that it's got great sharpness and a wide aperture, is light and small, affordable, and a dream to handle also counts. And with this lens I seem to use manual focusing more frequent than autofocus. It's a no-hassle lens, really.

"So, at last I can say that I've  found my normal lens! From now on there will always be a 35mm equivalent at hand, either on the camera or in my camera bag.

"I found this review helpful when deciding to go for this lens."

Frank (partial comment): "I'm not really qualified to judge its optical qualities, but the physicality of the lens makes me want to use it. [...] One optical negative that I've noticed is that taking pictures of neon signs at night really leaves a pronounced ghost. It happens somewhat with other lenses too, though.

For the complete text of partial comments, please see the Comments section. —Ed.

Harold Merklinger: "I have never used this lens, or even seen one, but I think I can still make a useful observation. The lens seems to be lacking a distance scale. There is a decorative depth-of-field scale, but no distance scale with which to use it. I looked at two other photos of this lens model on the internet. One showed a distance scale of somewhat limited scope: the only distance marks were 2, 5, and infinity. The other had no distance scale, but at least had a place for one—unlike the lens in your picture. [The focus ring snaps up and back to shift from manual focus to AF, which accounts for the apparent contradiction in appearance —Ed.] The depth of field scale itself appears to be an 'artist's depiction.' The aperture marks are not spaced quite correctly relative to one another. Mind you, that can be said of some real [i.e., manual —Ed.] lenses I've seen too."

[Old friend Harold retired in 2001 as Director-General of the Defence Research Establishment Atlantic (Canada) in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, where he specialized in sonar research for the Canadian Navy and Air Force. He authored a pioneering article about bokeh in 1997. Several of his excellent photo-tech books are available for download here. —Ed.]

Eric Erickson: "I really do like the lens, and find myself using this lens and the Leica Summilux 25mm the most. I have all the zooms for the Olympus E-M1 but when traveling I like to stick to one lens, generally a prime. The images this lens produces are sharp and the color rendition is perfect.

Photo by Eric Erickson

"This image is a simple street shot from Paris I took last Fall. I had with me only this lens and the camera. It is a very liberating experience to travel with one camera and one lens. I do not have to think about which focal length to use, or whether I need to zoom; I don't have to think about changing the lens and putting something else on the front of the camera, because that is all I am carrying.

"When I travel, we are on and off planes, trains, buses and cars. I do not work from my trunk like a lot of photographers, so whatever equipment I need for the day is with me all day. This is why I continue to travel with the Olympus and several small lenses. I do have a big old Nikon D800 sitting in my closet gathering dust. I like the full frame sensor, and I keep it and the assorted lenses thinking that maybe, just maybe, Nikon will introduce a mirrorless camera at some point. However it does not seem to be happening. Until then, I will use this little gem of a lens and the Olympus E-M1."

Bruce Bodine: "Robin Wong has several photos and comments about the lens and yes I know he is now an Olympus employee. I have found it to be an excellent companion on my EM-1 for those low light interior photos."

Nicholas Dunning (partial comment): "I owned the 17mm for a while and the short summary I could give of it is that it is a good all-round lens that does a lot of things well but nothing great."

Karl: "Love this lens! I'll be starting my one year challenge in the next week or so and it will be what I use.

Catch of the Day
Sunset Pier

"Small, light, fast to focus—isn't this the attraction of Micro 4/3 to begin with? I really like how the front element doesn't extend, all focusing is internal. Implies some sort of sealing [Internal focusing often means less dust incursion, but the 17mm is not weather-sealed. —Ed.]. Plus I can put it right up against glass and not have the camera move a bit when it locks focus."

Carl: "I got one of these about five months ago, and it immediately became my most-used lens for digital capture. The focal length is just right for me, it handles and balances great on a Lumix GX7. It has a special 'look' to the images that I won't try to describe technically but I'll just say I like it.

"I'll try inserting a link to this morning's post at my blog, which, like a majority of posts there over the past months, was made with this lens."

JK: "I’ve already written about this lens for TOP (here) but I’ll add just a bit. There’s something smooth yet sharp to its rendering that I find totally addictive. It reminds me of the old 35mm Summicron, or that lovely lens on the original Konica Hexar. In any case it spends a lot more time on my camera than this 50mm shooter would have ever imagined. Recent example here.

"By current Micro 4/3 lens standards, the Panasonic 20mm is a bit pokey to focus in good light, but it's no deal breaker. The real problem is in lower light, where focus slows to a crawl, hunts, and sometimes fails altogether."

Photo by sneye

sneye: "I've been using the Olympus 17mm ƒ/1.8 for almost two years. I have mixed feelings about it. In physical terms it is excellent: small, light, metal-clad and solid. Love the manual-focus mechanism with its distance scale, which makes it street ready. Optically, I've seen sharper glass (especially for distant subjects). It also suffers from the dreaded 'shutter shock' more than other lenses I use, but there are ways to avoid issues.

"Importantly for me, it has a very fine micro contrast which makes it highly suitable to monochrome. I would not recommend it for landscape or architecture photography, but it's more than adequate for human subjects and their environment."

Ash: "The 17mm ƒ/1.8!

"I used this lens heavily for two years, and it hit all of the right buttons. Sharp, small, fast autofocus, classic focal length, nice build quality. Combine it with the Olympus 45mm ƒ/1.8 for a great two-lens combo.

"If you enjoy shooting the 35mm view, then this lens deserves your consideration.

"It is good for family: "Good for streets and travel:

"And handles flare in a very pleasing manner, especially when used wide open at night."

Photos by Ash

Rod Thompson: "I have a real love/hate relationship with this lens. In a recent comparison with the brilliant 23mm Fuji (on an X-E1), I duplicated a morning's mixed pictures with the two (RAW with the Olympus and JPEG with the Fuji) and printed them (on a Canon Pixma PRO9000 Mark II).

"At 11x14 size, I could not split them! The Olympus system usually won on accuracy of focus and had the added depth-of-field benefit; the Fuji lens was on close inspection the sharper optic, but this was lost in the prints. I have had and am looking at getting again the Panasonic 20mm for the added 'snap,' but the Olympus is still my choice for fast street shooting.

"I must admit to having regular crisis of confidence regarding the lens, but it constantly stands up to comparison. It is not super sharp first shot, but sharpens well as long as the photo is not murky and noisy, where noise reduction can make sharpening a real tug of war. With plenty of contrast and good exposure, it goes well.

"Ming Thein has a good review, Steve Huff also. It is a real test of sufficiency in optics balanced against a great handling experience. I had to agree with 'A Little Lens Tale' on this blog as I have owned both of the noted lenses (the 28mm Canon and the 17mm Olympus)."

Eamon Hickey: "When I did the 'shooter's report' for Imaging Resource's review of the Olympus E-P5, the camera came with the 17mm ƒ/1.8. There's a plethora of my pictures and a short-ish write-up in the IR review and in the gallery associated with it (scroll down to the shooter's report section).

"Executive summary: I really liked it for street and travel shooting. Very compact but well-built. Love the 'snap focus' feature. It exhibits some distortion, chromatic aberration, and 'bokeh fringing,' but I personally really liked its rendering quality, which I would call smooth, for lack of a smarter observation.

"Imaging-Resource also did a formal set of tests of the lens, and there's a link to that test in the review I mentioned above.

"Here's a picture of a New York City summer evening that I liked but IR didn't see fit to publish:

Photo by Eamon Hickey

Alan Ross: "The Micro 4/3 forum has a thread of sample images from each of the Micro 4/3 lenses. The one for the Olympus 17mm ƒ/1.8 is here. I'm shopping for a 'normalish' prime lens, so will be interested in the feedback you get."

Photo by Dori

Dori: "This is a photograph I took in Venice, Italy, at night. I love how well the E-P5 and the 17mm worked in such low light. The colors are great."

Ctein: "I find that Photozone's reviews come closest to my experiences with (and tests of) lenses.I find them especially valuable when I'm comparing across lenses where I already own one of the lenses they've reviewed. They're my go-to place. Also, their sample photos actually tend to be useful! Wonder of wonders. Here's their review of the 17mm."

Andre T. Nygen: "I used mine for about a year but replaced it with the Panasonic/Leica 15mm which is much sharper wide open; an important factor for me since I shoot portraits and require that narrow depth-of-field so very precious to Micro 4/3 shooters. Comparing prints by looking at individual eyelashes of my subjects, I find the Leica-branded lens to be superior in terms of sharpness. When stopped down, they are both very similar."

David Littlejohn: "This is the lens I use to document my life. Mounted on a Panasonic GF6, it is generally in my jacket pocket or in my hand when I leave the house. It gets used mostly in social situations: holidays, parties, vacations, hanging out. Inside, I shoot it wide open to one stop down. I find that it's usually better to shoot wide open and get a higher shutter speed. When conditions are good, I shoot it at ƒ/4.

"I have to turn on Remove Chromatic Aberration in LR. And I sometimes lighten up the corners a bit to counteract vignetting. Other than that, the lens is trouble-free and makes very nice pictures."

Alan: "I'll throw in my two cents. This is my most-used Micro 4/3 lens, which is a secondary system for me. It has a relatively sharp center, has good color, bokeh, and flare control. Its relatively compact, focuses fast, and is light weight.

"However, it is bigger and more expensive than the Panasonic 20mm 1.7, its finish wears pretty easily (especially on the focus ring), and has a fair bit of software correction (particularly distortion and vignetting). That means softer and noisier edges.

"I use it on an E-PL5 mostly, as a lightweight, fast, compact setup. I think the 20mm 1.7 is a better lens optically (not to mention I love its size) but the autofocus is miles better on the Olympus. I have not tried the Panasonic 15mm ƒ/1.7 but looks around the same size, and is more expensive. I do not find I use the focus clutch much, as I find its autofocus pretty reliable. Its important on this system to be compact, fast focusing, light weight, and relatively inexpensive. This lens checks all those boxes.

Bigger here

Bigger here

Jayson Merryfield: "About me: I shoot people mostly, and am a part-time professional wedding and portrait photographer who has been shooting with Olympus gear for a few years now, starting in 2009. Last spring I bought an E-M1 and picked up this lens at the same time, and it remains my only native Micro 4/3 lens. I convert the rest of my lens collection to the E-M1 via convertor, which works well enough for me at this point.

Photo by Jayson Merryfield

"About the lens: the number one thing that leaps out to me (and anyone else I show it to) is just how preposterously small it is, particularly compared to the full frame equivalents that my industry peers here use. Almost any body that it’ll pair with is small enough to be notable, but the sheer difference in lens size borders on incredible.

"Image quality wise, I am not a great reviewer, as I have limited experience with other brands. After shooting for a year with this lens, nothing stands out as a negative in this area. Focus is quick and accurate in good light and in bad. Detail and sharpness is more than adequate without being overmuch, and in particular I find this lens is very friendly with faces and people in general.

"Honestly, I have a lot of difficulty separating the overall image quality of this lens from my excitement in having a fast, slightly wide lens from Olympus. Being able to get any amount of background separation when shooting wide has been a want of mine for years, and I’m finally able to get it. Plus, I’m finding that 35mm-e is just a wonderful focal length for environmental portraiture."

Photo by Andrei Kozlov

Andrei Kozlov: "To me this 17mm is a perfect vacation lens. It has very natural field of view: large enough, but not too wide to cause distortions. Additional bonus: when 'developing' RAWs in Capture One, you get quite a bit of extra, perfect for situations when you'd wanted it just a little bit wider....

"Here is an example set—spring break vacation with our son that was shot mostly with 17mm. (I am building my personal time machine with these photos, and 35mm equivalent field of view is just perfect for it.)"

And the last word from...

Gordon Lewis: "I shot this photo while testing the Olympus EP-5 (Part I, Part II) with 17mm ƒ/1.8 Zuiko for TOP. What impresses me most about this lens is that I could get so much depth-of-field and center-to-edge sharpness at ƒ/4.5 and so little veiling glare, even with heavy backlighting. The tonality of the sheen on the water is amazing, as is the amount of detail in the vegetation. Its ability to render a demanding scene like this so well tells me more than any lines-per-millimeter or MTF chart ever could."

I hope you enjoyed this variety of opinions from many users. I want to thank everyone who commented and who sent me pictures, especially the pictures I was not able to use—I received far more than I could publish. Thanks to all.

Here again is the B&H Photo link. Here is the 17mm ƒ/1.8 from Amazon, and from Amazon UK, and here are our other links.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)

Open Mike: Perfect Pots and Posts About Nothing

Hey, if Seinfeld can do a whole series about nothing...

It's funny, but I don't plan posts out beforehand. I just sit down and write. Often, I'll just grab something out of the air or the email stack and go.

Ctein was different, back when he was writing columns. He kept a list of ideas and planned columns ahead of time, and would write several in a row in advance if he planned to be traveling. I'm not that organized.

Sometimes my method works, sometimes it doesn't. It makes my periods of "writer's block" rather harrowing, for one thing. But it allows me a lot of freedom, too.

It's why I've never written a book about photography. I'd have to plan it.

Writers have to get used to the fact that their talent often has a particular range. I was recently mulling over the fact that John Szarkowski's history of photography, called Photography Until Now, was so eagerly anticipated in the early '90s, but is out of print and all but forgotten now. He was a superb writer, but a history, it must be admitted, did not fit his strengths—he didn't do the grand sweep well; he was better at miniature pieces, forwards and short essays and the like. He wrote many fine things (we sorely need a "collected works," especially since so many of his things were scattered about and far-flung) but his masterpiece remains Looking at Photographs: 100 Pictures from the Collection of The Museum of Modern Art. Which is still in print.

Another fine photography writer who "wrote small" was the late Bill Jay, who died in 2009. (I prefer to think he's still alive, and staged his own death so people would leave him alone in his Costa Rican retirement. It has the disadvantage of not being true, but it's a nicer thought and I'm going to go on thinking it.) A fairly good list of his books can be found at his Wikipedia page; my favorite remains Occam's Razor: An Outside-In View of Contemporary Photography. It's out of print and unfortunately hard to find for anything like a reasonable price (it's a small paperback, so paying >$40 seems a stretch. It might be available as a download). An entertaining and fun book.

I always thought that book was hurt by Bill's puzzling decision to illustrate it with old etchings with odd elements added on, pastiche-style. A daring choice, but one that didn't work. Most people didn't accept them as whimsical; they just thought they were missing some elusive point.

Of course Bill's book with his mentor and friend, Welsh Magnum photographer David Hurn, On Being a Photographer: A Practical Guide, remains must reading for any photo hobbyist, enthusiast, or amateur who cares anything about pictures. That one is available as a download, I believe, from LensWork.

We need a "collected works" (or selected works) of Bill Jay, too. LensWork #83 (The Bill Jay's Best of EndNotes issue) is a good introduction to him if you don't know him. That's a $3.95 Kindle download, so we can't complain about the price there.

Since this is a post about nothing, an update on the field in back of my house:

Geese flying in the right direction, late yesterday afternoon. This picture, of course, was taken with the Fuji. No, the iPhone. No, the Fuji. Hmm. Which was it? If I were doing my OC/OL/OY, this wouldn't come up.

So I wanted to pass along a few tips on good bargains, but before I leave the topic I wasn't even writing about, books, I should mention that Michael Kenna's much-anticipated and long-awaited book on France, called, um, France, is out, and going fast. In case you are among Michael's legions of fans.

A spread from Michael Kenna's new book France

If I buy it I'll shelve it right next to Ralph Gibson's L'Histoire de France, which is one of my favorite Ralph Gibson books even though it's perhaps (?) his only book in color.

Dealz!
So I wanted to tip you off to two nice products, in case you're interested. Keep in mind this is "off-topic" day.

The first is causing me a fair bit of angst and agony. Wharfedale, the august old British speaker manufacturer, issued a beautiful little mini-monitor several years back to commemorate its 80th anniversary, called the "Denton" after one of the company's heritage products. The Denton 80th Anniversary is a premium mini-monitor to the manor born, very well made in a classic "retro" style.

The modern Denton was designed by one of my favorite speaker designers, Peter Comeau. Peter was a designer for the British brand Mission in the timeframe of the '70s or '80s (I'm not really sure) and then designed several beautiful modern variants of the old Dynaco aperiodic speakers (such as the A-25) for a British kit company. I tried to buy one of those but the kit people weren't set up to send things to America and wanted more than $500 just for shipping costs. Now Peter's the chief of design for Wharfedale, which is currently owned by the Chinese; he lives in China and has, I hear, a largely free hand with design and manufacturing—current Wharfedale Jade speakers are made almost 100% in-house, whereas even many insanely priced "high-end" speakers still use off the shelf parts and drivers.

The thing you really need, in order to design speakers at the top level, is ears. Peter's are among the best. He really hits the many trade-off points just right, by my lights.

Anyway, the Denton mini-monitor was a good deal when it came out at $1,000—many carriage-trade manufacturers charge $1,500 to $3,000 even for fairly basic two-ways.

Wharfedale Denton commemorative model, 12.6Hx7.8Wx10.8D,
designed by Peter Comeau

But now the Denton 80th Anniversary is on closeout for a mere $500. This is what is known as a "steal"—if, of course, you like mini-monitors, which I do.

This is driving me crazy. I would dearly love to buy a pair of these and keep them till I die. But I do not have $500 to throw around (that's a plane ticket to see S.!); I have three pairs of speakers already (okay, one for the TV); and I have no real need for a pair of mini-monitors. They work best in small rooms (but away from the wall), and my current office is most of the whole basement.

It's killin' me. It really is.

If you buy a pair, keep in mind that they need to be paired with an amp of good quality and good power; no little wimpy amps need apply. My 35wpc EL34 tube amp would not do the trick. Little speakers, big amp—doesn't seem to "go," but that's the way it is.

And please, if you buy a pair, tell me, so I can enjoy the purchase vicariously.

The second nice thing I've discovered recently is a line of nice...well, pots.

I'm outfitting my kitchen, see. I'm using this book, by Mark Bittman, which was a gift from S. Naturally, being a male non-cook, I have alighted with gusto on the gear part, and am putting off the part where you actually have to start to cook things.

But never mind. My only saucepan prior to a few weeks ago was a very cheap, very old, very beat-up old non-stick thing with most of the non-sticky stuff worn away. To replace it I was going to buy an All-Clad, until I realized that All-Clad is like the Leica of cookware, and beyond me 'umble means.

Then I remembered an occasion when we teased my younger brother relentlessly. He had just bought a condo in D.C.—this was the '80s—and was outfitting his little kitchenette, and he shopped obsessively for cookware. And spent, on pots and pans, what I thought at the time was a ridiculous amount of money. Naturally, being brotherly, I began taunting and tormenting him about his odd obsession with "the perfect pans."

A few months ago, stuck, I called Scott, and asked him what the perfect pans actually were way back when. Cuisinart, he said—and he mentioned (with the serenity of knowing he was right back then) that they are still in great shape and he and his wife still use them every day. So how many saucepans have I gone through in 30 years? I didn't know—maybe a dozen?

So anyway, I ended up buying this, and it's a surprisingly beautiful thing. It's Cuisinart, like Scott's. The key word to look for when shopping is "MultiClad," which signifies the good 'uns in the brand's line. Yes, it's probably made in China, whereas All-Clad is made in America, but it costs $39 vs. the All-Clad's $139. Not every German can afford a Leica, either.

Am I allowed to recommend a pot? I don't know. I can't even cook. But it's very well made, extremely pleasing, and didn't break the bank. Thought you should know.

[UPDATE: Whoops, this is actually the one I have. My mistake. Sorry.]

So this post was only half off-topic, which isn't bad for a Sunday. Enjoy the rest of your day. I'm almost done with the Crowdsourced lens review, which I'll post in the morning.

Mike
(Thanks to Scott)

Sunday is when Yr. Hmbl. Ed. gets put on work-release and goes wandering off on his own.

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

No featured comments yet—please check back soon!

Rolleiflex

Think you love Rollei? Not like these people.

Mike

ADDENDUM: Best camera tattoo belongs to Lotte van den Acker of Rotterdam, the Netherlands:

According to Fstoppers, Lotte is a studying digital photography at the Willem de Kooning Academy in Rotterdam. Here's her website. Photography for the Fstopper interview by Dylan Ray Fenix and Niké Dolman (not sure which one did this picture, or I'd say).

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Ned Bunnell: "I'm too old to understand what motivates one to cover their body with tattoo art, but I think Lotte's choice of camera is pretty cool."

[Ned is the former President of Pentax USA. —Ed.]

M. Guarini: "I always wanted a Rollei, I always wanted one, I'm so sad."

Mike replies: Of course, you can still have one. All you need is access to a good camera repairperson, of which there are still many. A used camera of virtually any vintage in good shape can be restored to perfect working condition in most cases. There are a few trouble spots with Rolleis: for instance, the old selenium meters often fail (and are often nonlinear even when they appear to work), and if the sliding front standard has been knocked out of true it can be more difficult to repair than it's worth. I would make arrangements to have the Rollei checked before you buy it, then get return privileges from the seller. Have it checked immediately on receipt to insure that it's in good shape.

An interesting twist is that now, you might want one with a lens that shows more flaws—and more character—rather than going for the "best" or sharpest lens. Who cares any more if your film work is "sharp"? I'd rather have it look more like film. Sharpness is for digital. :-)

You could have fun researching a purchase, hunting down the right camera, and getting it rebuilt. Maybe start by looking for a camera that was made around the time you were born!

Maggie Osterberg: "That brings a whole new meaning to 'manual camera.'"

The End of the End

Vivian Maier with her Rolleiflex

It appears that Rollei has finally used up the last of its nine lives, friend Oren writes. (The link is to an insolvency auction of the assets of DHW Fototechnik GmbH, in Braunschweig, Germany, formerly Franke & Heidecke GmbH, longtime manufacturers of the Rolleiflex.)

Sic transit gloria mundi.

Original Rollei, c. 1928. (Photo courtesy Eugene Ilchenko/Camerapedia)

Mike
(Thanks to Oren Grad)

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Damien: "My dear Rolleicord is now orphaned! Well, just like every single camera I own. Browsing through the auction pictures... Such a sad feeling, all these tools and unfinished parts now abandoned and useless, going for little more than the price of raw materials. This picture is especially poignant. Now, someone explains what the hell is going on with lot #1007.

Mike replies: Made me laugh. What indeed.

Gabe: "The end of a giant...A lingering death for Rollei.

"I learned photography from my fiancée's uncle Otto—childless, great wife, worshiped by every teen on the lake, and he took the time to gently and patiently teach me on his (already classic by then) late 'fifties Rolleiflex 2.8.

"The meter had died long ago—and was deemed not worthy of repair. To this day, I can shoot Tri-X indoors or out without a meter, thanks to that dead cell. In comparison the Hassie was a stupendously loud, earthshakingly mirror-slapping, darkened-viewfinder, uncouth upstart. The Rollei was a stealthy, silent, gentleman's camera. How do you think Helmut Newton managed to sneak up on all those naked ladies?

"Not long after Otto passed away (way too early) his wife handed me the Rollei saying 'he would have wanted you to have it.' I've had the camera for 40+ years. The fiancée too...but she turned into a marvel of a wife.

"I've had the Rollei tuned up every eight years or so, and although I don't put too much film through anything anymore, I frequently hold it, peer down, focus / crank / back 1/2 and shoot. Still silent, still smooth focusing, crank and shutter 'like butter' and an astonishing 3-D view. Every photo enthusiast, or young snapper who's never shot or held one is astounded by the solid little beast, and awed by the view and clarity of the viewing screen (custom upgrade 'bright screen' by Harry Fleenor)."

"Having traded hundreds of cameras; this is one of two I would never sell."

Oh What Weather (OT)

You might remember that I've been bellyaching (for instance in the recent "Lamb of Spring" post) about the cold here. Well, turns out February 2015 in Southeastern Wisconsin was the sixth-coldest on record and the coldest since 1936, so at least I wasn't just imagining it.

But now this whole week has been one long serene and blissful thaw—along with an orderly melting of the snowpack, which is almost gone save for big drifts and places protected from Southern exposure. And today it's been as warm as 67°F (19.4°C), with bright sun, blue skies, and a gentle balmy breeze. I shoveled snow off the deck in my shirtsleeves, and, just for fun, took an iPhone snap of myself sunbathing*.

I think it was Amory Lovins, co-founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute, who proposed that the term "global warming" should be retired and "global weirding" adopted instead. It is seductive, though—winter might have more in store for us yet, but this is one of the most satisfying arrivals of Springtime I can remember.

Just thought I should say, so you don't think I just like to complain all the time.

Mike

*Yes, another selfie. I know, I'm worried too.

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Patrick: "That's you? When I first glanced at the photo I was wondering why you had posted a picture of John Goodman."

Mike replies: It's maybe not the most flattering angle. But I am not nearly as fearless in that regard as Lee Friedlander.

Random Excellence: André Kertész

Copyright the Estate of Andre Kertesz, courtesy James Hyman Photography, London

André Kertész, Self-Portrait, 1926

I like, admire, and enjoy Mozart, but love Haydn. The Papa Haydn of photographers was André Kertész, who was born in Hungary but lived in Paris between the World Wars and, after fleeing the Nazis, in America, in New York. His work was somewhat limited in emotional range—I believe one writer likened it to the range a composer for piano who avoids either end of the keyboard; he doesn't go grim and he never gets sappy—but warmth and humanity radiates through his pictures. His biography is touching: his midlife years were difficult, because he was ignored in America after his emigration here, after having found success easily in Europe. But his pictures never showed his bitterness. Kertész had a wonderful heart. As with Mozart and Haydn, I like, admire, and respect Cartier-Bresson, but love Kertész. His work is gentle, humane and humanistic, and one always got the sense from it that he had a naturally beautiful soul.

Compare and contrast these two treatments of the same motif, two people peering through a barricade:

Kertész

Cartier-Bresson

There's the difference between the two photographers in a nutshell; Kertesz's photograph is more about the relationship between the two people; Cartier-Bresson's is more enigmatic, with an edge of the surreal, and the relationship between the two figures is only visual, separated by that hard dark spearing line of the pole, which the second man's face oddly appears to be pressed against.

Kertész's reputation was at its peak in the 1980s, in the years surrounding his 1985 death. He was "rediscovered" and accorded great honor at the end of his life. The "holy grail" book of his work dates from those years—1986's André Kertész: Diary of Light 1912–1985. Crafted in Japan, it's printed by tripletone offset on a special cotton rag paper called sala. There were only three thousand copies printed. The Editions Hazan book by Michel Frizot is much more recent (2010) and should be easier to find. In any event, any decent library will have Kertész titles in its photography section, and it would be worth a visit to see what yours has.

His great love for his wife Elizabeth was especially touching; they were very close all their lives, and he adored her. In old age, housebound, grieving for her, he made a series of Polaroid photos of a small abstract glass bust on his windowsill, because the curve of its shoulder reminded him of Elizabeth.

The self-portrait at the top is from an upcoming show at the James Hyman Gallery in London, UK, which starts on May 13th and runs until the same day in June. (One of the treats of the recent Thomas Walther Collection show I got to see at MoMA was a row of original Kertész prints.)

Oh, and speaking of Cartier-Bresson, Kertész took the warmest picture of the famously camera-shy Henri, with his wife Martine Franck.

Mike

P.S. I'll be working on the Olympus 17mm ƒ/1.8 crowdsourced review for the rest of today. I'll try to get it posted tonight, but there's a lot. Could be Monday.

UPDATE: There's also a Kertész show coming on May 2 at the Stephen Bulger Gallery in Toronto, Ontario. Thanks to Larry Manuel for this. —Ed.

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Nigel Voak: "André Kertész: Sixty Years of Photography is a book a reach for when I’m a bit down in the dumps. It always cheers me up. There is a warmth and joy of living in this photographers work that make him my favorite photographer. The photo you chose of the couple peering through a hole is a perfect example of why his work connects to me so strongly."

expiring_frog: "You echo my thoughts! Your first paragraph is exactly how I have always felt about Kertész. My favourite photographer."

Jan Kwarnmark: "When asked about Kertész, Henri Cartier-Bresson showed his reverence by saying: 'We all owe something to Kertész.' and even 'Whatever we have done, Kertész did first.' I found it in an article by Eric Kim, but it is easy to find in other articles about Kertész. And, referring to Mozart, Mozart was one of many who said 'Papa Haydn,' as a term of affection."

Bill Pierce: "I lived on East Fourth St. in NYC and used to wander around the Lower East Side taking pictures. There was an older gentleman who I would occasionally see shooting on the same streets. I would smile and wave, and he would smile and wave back. It took me a little while to realize that the older gentleman was Andre Kertész, who lived on Fourth St. on the north side of Washington Square Park."

John Camp: "I completely agree with you. Three other nice books on Kertész are Kertész on Kertész from Abbeville Press [that's another particular favorite of mine as well —MJ]; the big retrospective catalog published by the Jeu De Paume (the English-language version is distributed by the Yale University Press) called Kertész [that's the Michel Frizot title I linked —MJ], and the smaller Stranger to Paris published by the Jane Corkin Gallery of Toronto.

"Stranger to Paris looks so much like Diary of Light that I thought I might own the latter, went to look, and it was Stranger to Paris instead. Both have 'Chez Modrian' on the cover.

"As a large format book of 359 pages, the Jeu de Paume retrospective is by far the most comprehensive Kertész book, to my knowledge, and includes a brief selection of his color Polaroids. I'm lucky enough to own signed prints of 'Chez Modrian' and 'Satiric Dancer' acquired through the Mayans Gallery in Santa Fe, back when photography was still affordable. The gallery owner, Ernesto Mayans, was a good friend of Kertész, and hosted him here in Santa Fe shortly his death."

Jim Hughes: "In the mid-1980s, shortly before André's death, a man named Stan Kulesa found himself face to face with Kertész at an exhibit of the great photographer's work at a Manhattan gallery. They seemed to be alone in the white-walled space, surrounded by André's prints. According to a comment he posted on the American Masters PBS online site many years later in 1999, Kulesa spoke first, and announced to Kertész that '[you are] my #1 favorite photographer of all time.'

He graciously thanked me, and asked if I was a photographer. "Oh no, I'm only an amateur," I responded. His response floored me when he said, "I'm an eternal amateur." ...He made me feel like a million dollars.

"From my perspective, I've always regarded André Kertész to be the most graceful photographer who ever lived, as I wrote in a piece for TOP in 2011. The article can be found in the right-hand sidebar under my name. Just scroll all the way down to 'Chez Mondrian and Other Small Pleasures.'

"In that piece, I quote the poet Paul Dermée, who wrote, on the occasion of André's first Paris exhibit in the 1920s: 'No rearranging, no posing, no gimmicks, nor fakery. Your technique is as honest, as incorruptible, as your vision. In our home for the blind, Kertész is 'Brother Seeing-Eye.'

"Roland Barthes evidently agreed. He called André's work 'a photography that thinks.'

"I call it poetry."

Rodger Kingston: "In February of 1973, on our wedding trip to NYC, Carolyn and I wandered into the Hallmark Gallery on 5th Avenue in what turned out to be the last hour of the last day of a large Andre Kertész show. As luck would have it, who should be there but the master himself.

"A young poet recently turned photographer, I recognized him immediately, and dashed across the street to a Doubleday Bookshop, where I bought a copy of his On Reading. I'm quite sure I gushed. He was very warm and gracious in a courtly, European manner.

"He signed the book for us, and sometime after we got home, I wrote to him that meeting him at his exhibition was one of the highlights of our wedding trip. Almost nine months later, I received the following letter in reply:

2 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10011
November 17, 1973

Dear Mr. Kingston:

This reply to your appreciative letter has been so long delayed that you may have thought the written word had by now completely succumbed to the visual image.

I am indeed touched by the fact that you feel the Hallmark Gallery exhibit will remain memorable over the years as a part of your wedding trip. You see, that way I know my photographs will have as many happy anniversaries as you and your wife Carolyn!

With every good wish for your success as poet and photographer, and my warmest regards to both of you—

Sincerely,
André Kertész

"A year or two later, Kertész delivered a lecture in Boston. When I approached him during the reception, his eyes lit up; he reached out his hand to me and exclaimed, 'Ah, the bridegroom!'

"It's been over 40 years, and Andre Kertesz was right: his photographs have had many happy anniversaries with Carolyn and me."

Dave Jenkins: "I think Kertesz was probably one of the two or three greatest photographers of the 20th century. He was a seminal photographer, meaning he began ways of photographing that other photographers picked up and expanded upon. John Durniak, who was successively editor-in-chief of Popular Photography, picture editor of Time, and picture editor of the New York Times, wrote an article for the first issue of Popular Photography's 35mm Photography magazine (which soon thereafter became a long-running quarterly). In that article, titled 'Some Heroes of 35,' he said that "...35mm photography had three fathers—Oscar Barnack, Erich Salomon, and Andre Kertész...look at this photographer's work. One can see the start of what Bill Brandt later did with nudes, one can see 'decisive moments' before there ever was that phrase, one can see the basis for a solid generation of honest photography. Young men, one named Brassai...saw his pictures and in them found a whole new world of art and communication.'"

Panasonic 42.5mm: The Everyman Alternative

I hate to admit to ignorance professionally, but hey, when you're ignorant, you gotta 'fess up to it—it's only fair to people. So I admit I don't yet know how to distinguish between the fast-focusing Micro 4/3 lenses and the slow-focusing ones...although I've experienced it, in comparing the Panasonic 12–35mm ƒ/2.8, which is a speed demon on the E-M1 and E-M5 [note: link is to the Mark II but we tried it on Ctein's Mark I] and a favorite among lenses I've used recently, and my formerly beloved Panasonic 20mm ƒ/1.7, the rendering of which I love(d) but which is, alas, irremediably pokey in the focus speed department. Could someone please school me as to how to spot the difference?

I have to assume that the pictured lens, the just-announced Panasonic Lumix G 42.5mm ƒ/1.7 ASPH. Power O.I.S. (available for pre-order), is the faster-focusing type.

It goes head-to-head with Micro 4/3 collaborator/competitor Olympus's popular 45mm ƒ/1.8. The differences are negligible, save one. Light-gathering power of ƒ/1.7 vs. ƒ/1.8 is barely more than the margin of error in aperture calibration between lenses, the focal length of 85mm-e vs. 90mm-e is not detectable by viewers of prints (although I've always fancied I can tell the difference when shooting). The new Panasonic offering is just slightly shorter and more squat in size and 14 grams heavier, again negligible differences, and the prices at this writing are within $1.01 of each other.

There might of course be differences in rendering (not that the Olympus is any slouch), although that remains to be seen.

The one real difference is that the Panasonic lens has IS built-in, and the Olympus doesn't—hardly a problem if you use one of Olympus's cameras with state-of-the-art IBIS (in-body image stabilization).

So is the Oly lens one of the fast-focusing ones, or not? Ignorance is hell.

Previously, in the Panasonic lineup, we had only the famous but pricey Panasonic/Leica DG Nocticron 42.5mm ƒ/1.2, also aspherical, also Power O.I.S. But at nearly $1,400, it is a purchase to delay for many Micro 4/3 fans. The new lens knocks off a bit of light-gathering power, but sheds weight as well (295 grams to be precise), and shaves about a grand off the price. The two lenses provide a useful choice if you want to stick to the Panasonic brand.

Virtually nothing photographic triggers my Pavlovian slobber response like a medium-speed 85mm or 85mm-e lens. We all have our preferred lens kits, and a pairing of a medium-speed 35mm-equivalent with a medium-speed 85mm-e has long done the trick for me. It's not like anyone who already owns the Oly 45mm needs an alternative. But those who don't have a short tele yet—considering also the availability of the older Panasonic/Leica Macro-Elmarit 45mm ƒ/2.8 (my personal choice when I shot Micro 4/3, and a bokeh master) and the delightful superfast all-metal manual-focusing Voigtländer Nokton 42.5mm ƒ/0.95—well, they're spoiled for choice.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

No featured comments yet—please check back soon!

Quote o' the Day: Jim Richardson

“Might I vote for a new camera category: the Interchangeable Software Camera. The ISC. From a fair bit of experience with an iPhone (and a few decades with SLRs) I've come to the conclusion that camera makers have seriously underrated the value of interchangeable software. Apps give you all sorts of creative possibilities. Apps are fun. Given the choice of spending $1,000 on a new lens that might improve your pictures or spending $15 on five new apps that you can go out and play with tomorrow, I think lots of photographers are figuring out where the fun is.

”

Jim Richardson

Our friend Jim Richardson, a Kansan, has photographed more than 30 stories for National Geographic magazine and is a Contributing Editor of NG's sister publication Traveler magazine.

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

No featured comments yet—please check back soon!

Update: Film Director Sentenced to Prison Time

Do you remember our discussion a year ago about the disaster on the Altamaha River in Georgia? Director Randall Miller, who allegedly flaunted his image as a renegade and rulebreaker, has now pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter in the death of 27-year-old camera assistant Sarah Elizabeth Jones during filming on train tracks on a trestle bridge over the river. The sentence includes two years in prison, eight years on parole, and a $20,000 fine.

Miller becomes the first film director to serve time for a death on set.

The incident resulted in a lot of discussion here on TOP, and some of it got heated when we advised against the convention of posing portraits on railroad tracks. Some people refuse to believe that being on railroad tracks could be dangerous...a perception which leads to people dying there (it also leads to accidental deaths being assumed to be suicides).

To repeat our advice then: "Venture there yourself if you want to risk your own life—photographers do take foolish risks to get photographs—but keep your clients, friends and models off train tracks. Using train tracks as a setting for photographs is an illegal, unethical, and unsafe practice."

Out-of-service stretches of track set aside for public use are an exception.

Miller's wife and collaborator Jody Savin goes free under the terms of the deal, despite originally facing charges similar to those her husband pleaded guilty to.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Chuck Albertson: "Back in February, a guy got killed south of here while taking a selfie standing between the northbound and southbound tracks of the BNSF main line. He only saw the southbound train coming. And yesterday, a woman was so engrossed in texting someone on her smartphone that she ducked under the safety barrier at a crossing and was clipped by a freight train (and lived)."

Disclaimer

Rumors that Yr. Hmbl. Ed. is becoming an iPhoneographer are greatly exaggerated. I just got a new phone is all, and I don't use it that much as a phone, much less a camera.

No, I like my current Fuji just fine, and need it for the work I want to do, and am planning to add more XF system lenses when I can afford to.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

No featured comments yet—please check back soon!

Corrections

Okay, no surprise, I got a few things about the iPhone wrong yesterday and don't want to let anyone go away with any wrong information on my account. First, "saying that an iPhone costs $199 is just plain wrong—wrong in the sense that it’s not factual, and wrong in the sense that it’s deliberately deceptive." (That's Dave R.) Some plans hide "layaway" payments for the device in the price of the plan, and it turns out it can be less expensive to pay full price for the phone and then just buy service without the device. So Bryce is right, it's expensive. Best advice is, do your homework, as I obviously did not.

One-handed shooting is possible using the volume buttons to
trigger the camera

There's no shutter lag with the iPhone 6+ camera that I can detect. The shutter fires with an extremely light touch (I can't touch it lightly enough to cause the shutter not to fire) and anyway you don't need to touch the screen at all—you can shoot one-handed by pushing the Up/Down volume buttons as well—they function as shutter buttons in camera mode. As far as I can detect, IS is working both for stills and video.

A few basic navigation tips: swiping down from the top windowscreens down your daily organizer, date and weather and so forth; swiping up from the bottom brings up basic and most-used controls, like volume and airline mode, which is where the flashlight is and where my calculator was hiding; and swiping in the middle of the screen brings up local search (Spotlight) for finding things on your phone, which some people use to navigate to their apps. (Thanks to Joe H. for some of these tidbits.)

Re my prediction, I didn't explain, because I don't understand it, but my feeling is that the use of multiple miniaturized camera units, in an array, linked by software, will one day actually overtake the use of large single sensors by allowing computational photography. This will have advantages over single-image capture that we* can't quite imagine yet, but see the Lytro camera for one example. You'll be able to choose parameters after the fact that you now how to choose prior to shooting; multiple shots with millisecond delays will allow computational sharpness correction and blur deconvolution; sensor binning will allow extreme low light capture; and it's possible that R, G, and B data collection duties will be separated between different sensors—possibly even using inherent mis-registration between sensors to usefully dither image information similar to the way the new Olympus E-M5 II mimics a larger sensor. As I say I'm not an expert and I have only superficial knowledge of what I'm talking about, but I do suspect that the camera in a smartphone or tablet in the future could possibly not just exceed a current Leica S or D810 in convenience, but in actual literal image quality. That was my prediction. But you need to allow for the fact that I know nothing.

...Consider, though, how far past the imaginations of 1965 the actual state-of-the-art smartphone of today is. They literally couldn't imagine then what we take for granted now. The same will be true of cameras when we finally get past the current model of a 35mm film camera with the film in the gate replaced by one large sensor. That those are still current is primarily a conceptual limitation, not a technical one; the vast, rich market for phones will enable, and encourage, development that we can't foresee.

Dick Tracy's two-way wrist radio (c. 1946) was upgraded to a two-way wrist-TV in 1964...did I mention yesterday that the iPhone includes Facetime?

My last mistake, which many readers pointed out (again, thanks) is that there is indeed a scientific calculator built in to the iPhone—you turn the calculator app sideways to see the additional function keys.

Belatedly doing due diligence in my reporting, I called my doctor brother Charlie to see if he remembered what he paid in high school for his first scientific calculator—it was $179, and he said it was "huge, the size of paperback novel." And his first outboard hard drive, the one the size of a phone book, was twenty MB, not eighty, and cost $829—and he says our other brother ridiculed his purchase, wondering how if the world he was ever going to fill up all that storage space!

Finally, a few words about the size of the 6+. I like it. It makes it easier to use as a photo viewer (photos are very seductive on the Retina screen in exquisite miniature), easier to use as a mini-tablet for reading, and easier to hold as a camera. Everything on it is easier to see and control. I can finally type halfway confidently—my fingers were just too big for the old phone's QWERTY keypad. Vs. the 6, not only has the 6+ been more popular than Apple thought it would be, but my seat-o'-the-pants anecdotal nonscientific survey indicates that roughly four out of five of us who bought 'em, like 'em. But YMMV.

Mike
(Thanks to many readers for their kind schooling of Ye Hmbl. Ed.)

*And by we I mean I

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Bruce Mc: "A couple of points: First, your phone camera's properties can change by using a different camera app. I have one app set up for casual shooting and one for more careful work. I know I could change the settings back and forth in one app, but having the two apps ready to go is more convenient for me.

"Second, I agree with your predictions, but they will get people stirred up. I'm old enough to remember the film vs. digital wars in the photography forums, and now we have phone vs. dedicated camera forum wars. Actually, I'm old enough to be on the side of the film guys in the film vs. digital wars, but I came to computers early (early 1970s) and photography late (mid 1980s). Currently I love dedicated cameras, and I even enjoy my time spent in Lightroom. I have to remind myself not to 'act like a film guy' towards people who prefer iPhones."

Eolake: "I think it takes a village of geniuses to really appreciate how great and revolutionary smartphones and tablets are. Just listing all the things one can do will fill a book! It's insane. And then add the fact that they are cheap, and do most of the things they do better than the things they replaced. I warmly recommend the newest event video on Apple.com. Just one little point blows ones mind: how much an iPhone can help medical research. It will be revolutionary. And it was not even made for that!"

Andre Y: "OK, how about something positive from the iPhone camp: Apple's major promotion of good photography in their latest campaign. Why aren't the camera companies doing this? Why does it take an outsider to show us why our hobby/craft/art is so great? The promotional pictures from camera and lens companies are anti-aspirational compared to Apple's photos in this campaign. Buy this umpteen-megapickle, cast unobtainium, price-of-a-small-used car camera system, and take...uninspiring, bad pictures, or hey look, your phone can take some pretty great pictures. I think it's pretty clear that camera companies don't really care about good photography anymore: the camera equipment is now the end in and of itself, not what you can do with one. Maybe Apple doesn't either, but at least they are aligning their commercial interests with people who do, and that's worth some attention."

Jim Richardson: "Might I vote for a new camera category: the Interchangeable Software Camera. The ISC. From a fair bit of experience with an iPhone (and a few decades with SLRs) I've come to the conclusion that camera makers have seriously underrated the value of interchangeable software. Apps give you all sorts of creative possibilities. Apps are are fun. Given the choice of spending $1,000 on a new lens that might improve your pictures or spending $15 on five new apps that you can go out and play with tomorrow, I think lots of photographers are figuring out where the fun is."

Congratulations Keck Contest Winners!

I'm pleased to announce the winners of the Keck Photo Contest:

David Jacobs

Melissa O'Shaughnessy

David Boyce

We'll have a Print Offer of all three of the winning prints, with the proceeds of the sales being the prize. (You'll see the winning images at that time.) The Grand Prize Winner, David Jacobs, also wins a week at a luxury condo in Hawaii courtesy of an anonymous reader (to whom many thanks).

In addition to the Contest Winners' Sale, we have two other Print Offers planned soon: One is a single, small silver print, called "The Card Game," the best or "signature" photo my 84-year-old father took during a lifetime as an enthusiastic amateur and semi-pro (a businessman, he wrote and illustrated articles for travel and food magazines on the side). The other is that we have an agreement in principle to offer some of the uncommonly beautiful, lyrical landscape work of Kate Kirkwood, with fine prints by Ctein.

We'll be doing the same thing again with the Contest Winners' Sale as we did with the Keck Contest. Any buyer of a print from that sale will be invited to submit work for a future sale*.

As I said before, I was very impressed both by the high average quality of the submissions and with readers' obvious printing skills. There were many outstanding submissions; choosing winners was uncommonly difficult. It was a satisfying experience for me to see so much nice work and so many beautiful prints (although I think my choices will be very controversial and will lead to much discussion. I hope no one's feelings will be hurt).

Thanks again to everyone who participated, and congratulations again to David J., Missy, and David B.

Mike

*The reason for the restriction is to limit the number of submissions. The 228 prints we received for the Keck Contest were about right for me to handle; an open submission might draw thousands of prints, which would overwhelm me.

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

No featured comments yet—please check back soon!

Open Mike: Mike's New Camera

No, it's not what you think—I haven't ditched one brand and skipped to another. My "real" camera is still my Fuji X-T1 and 23mm lens, and that's not changing. This is what I got:

Eolake Stobblehouse kindly shared his impressions of the iPhone 6+ and that pushed me over the edge. My old phone was a 4S, vintage late 2011. That's about 25 in dog years, and aren't smartphone years roughly equivalent to dog years?

In the picture (notice how I cleverly integrate the obligatory Butters shot for this week into this iPhone post—oh, canny blogger) we see Butters with Zander's former favorite new hat. Nefarious hound himself is observable in the upper right, back in the bokeh.

I took the 6+ as my only camera to a gathering last night and shot not only a number of pictures with it, but, in the "What's the World Coming To" category, videos as well. Mike shooting videos?!? Preposterous. But you know the old expression, When in iRome, do as the iRomans do. 

First impressions are that the camera, despite similar specs, actually is a big improvement. It's fun to use as a camera. The only thing that satisfies my creative itch right now is Fuji's inimitable way with B&W, but this is nice for snapshots.

Casual iPhone 6+ portrait photo the way it fell out of the phone. Don't know what's up with that color—discontinuous spectrum lighting perhaps? The color was uncorrectable, except by doing this...

By the bye, let me just make a prediction based on an old column of Ctein's and my sense of the smartphone market: somewhere in the 4–10-year timeframe, phone cameras will exceed the quality of all but the best professional DSLRs. Eventually, you'll use a small device with an array of camera modules to take an exposure that allows you to select things like angle of view and focus point after the fact, like we select white balance after the fact now, and which will easily adapt to huge file sizes or super light sensitivity as needed.

Of course, my crystal ball is a good deal cloudier than Ctein's.

Mike
(Thanks to Eolake)

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Barry Prager: "I live in San Francisco, so I see more people taking photos than most. I used to watch them taking crappy photos with a dedicated camera, which at least forced them to take photos in the more appropriate horizontal orientation. Now they're taking the vast number of photos in the vertical position, like they were holding the phone to their ear. Usually with one hand! They would be taking photos of the Grand Canyon in a vertical position. Also the vast number of pictures will remain on their phone as they don't know how to get them onto the computer, or what to do with them if they do. Many billions of crappy photos as digital vapor. No negatives, or any record, is their future. We're in the best of times for photography, and the worst."

Mike replies: One of the theses of John Szarkowski's Photography Until Now was that devices in part dictate the way they are used. And it's not like there haven't been vertical-format cameras before...for instance the Fuji GS645s and the Linhof 220.

Linhof 220

jim (partial comment): "We're in SF this weekend and the city is plastered with iPhone photo billboards promoting it as a camera."

Bryce Lee: "Oh my that gets expensive. Here in Canada basic iPhone 6+ starts at C$859.00 plus here in Ontario a 13 percent sales tax, total $970.67. That's a good chunk of cash...for a bloody telephone!"

Mike replies: Well, I don't know, Bryce...the basic iPhone 6+ is $299 with a calling plan, and you kinda need a calling plan, since it doesn't work without one.

And this isn't exactly news, but it's a little more than just "a bloody telephone." It's a telephone you can carry around with you. And it's a very good dictation machine, with instant OCR (optical character recognition) built in. And you can write notes or letters on it...that are delivered instantly, more or less.

And I paid $700 in 2003 for a worse camera, albeit with a zoom lens. And I used to carry a pocket flashlight, which the iPhone has built-in. In the early '90s I inherited a hard drive the size of a small phone book that my brother paid $800 for...that stored 80 megabytes. My iPhone has 64 gigabytes of storage. I used to pay a quarter to play a game of Asteroids on a large machine at the corner 7-11—the iPhone offers many more games than that, lots of them free. Remember when Scrabble came in a box that contained a fold-out board and little wooden tiles? My girlfriend and I play Scrabble on her iPhone.

It's an extremely accurate pocket watch. It's also a stopwatch (I had to buy one of those in high school), a timer, and a world clock. Remember organizers, or planners? Thick sheaves of bound paper with in a leather or vinyl wraparound binding? It's got that.

I always wanted an Epson Photo Viewer but could never afford one. The iPhone serves.

It's literally easier to get the current outdoor temperature on the iPhone than it is to look out the window at the thermometer.

My brother paid nearly $200 in high school for a scientific calculator. The calculator that comes with the iPhone is pretty basic, but I'll bet you can get apps for better ones.

I used to carry a sheaf of maps in the glove box in my car. The other day I needed to go somewhere I'd never been before, so I punched a button on the iPhone, said "Fork in the Road restaurant, Mukwonago, Wisconsin," and the iPhone spoke directions that took me to the front door. You can buy devices that only do that.

The other night it showed me which lanes of the freeway were closed for construction, before I left the house.

Remember the Sony Walkman? We paid good money for those in the '80s. You can store the equivalent of several sacks full of cassette tapes on the iPhone and listen to your music on earbuds, headphones, or any external device up to a full stereo rig if you want to.

It's a web browser. Tonight at dinner we used it to look up a list of all the museums in the Smithsonian system (the Hirshhorn and the National Zoo are part of the Smithsonian, turns out). I can even watch TV shows and movies on it, although I've never done so. Could replace the in-flight movie you used to watch on a long flight, but with a movie of your own choosing.

I use it to browse real estate listings.

It syncs with my car.

Best of all, you can read books on it. It's a bit small—I prefer my iPad Air for reading—but the 6+ is easily big enough to read on comfortably. It's even a book store, albeit one where it's harder to browse. I still like real bookstores. But then, from a real bookstore, I can't buy a book on a whim at 2 a.m. without getting out of bed, and start reading it 90 seconds later.

It does quite a few more useful things as well. Like it or don't like it, it's more than a bloody telephone!

Bryce replies to Mike: "Mike, and others..when I wrote my initial note was thinking outright purchase. I do not subscribe to this stupid contract bit although our government finally got off its collective ass so we are not bound by a three year contract. It is now a two-year contract plus the cost of the phone. Problem is here in Canada contract rates are C$50–90 a month plus toll charges plus the cost of the phone plus taxes. Have friends with an iPhone 6+ who are paying about $65 a month plus taxes and that's after being loyal custmers for years. Over two years, that new iPhone might be charged out at C$20.00/month give or take. It is as bad as if it were a fixed landline."

Mike replies: Well, but do you want them to give it to you for free? It's true, as Eolake points out, that Apple is richer than his home country (Denmark). But I'll give them my money for the product they're offering. It's worth it.

Here's the best expression of my feelings about the cost of the 6+:

Stephen Gilbert: "Do ya think there's a market for 'distressed' caps? A special 'Butters edition' à la the new Leica."

Speed: "Next thing we know, Mike will have an Instagram page."

Mike replies: What's this "Instagram" of which you speak? (I love being a Luddite, or at least playing one on the Internet.)

Steve P.: "Mike, I note with interest your detailed reply to Bryce Lee's comment and I'm wondering if you can get some kind of 'paddle app' for the iphone? I ask because if the iPhone ever fails you'll be right up S**t Creek!"

Mike replies: It's an issue. I've never had trouble with it myself, but my brother's iPhone failed at night in the thick of Boston traffic when they were depending on it to get to where they were going. It also looms as an issue in case of catastrophe, for instance natural disasters or war. But I presume we are working on contingency plans, since our government is so united and acting as one for the good of the people.

Jordi Pujol: "Used to have a Samsung S4 until recently when my dad got an iPhone 6 from a draw.

"As a student always wandering between home, city and campus I quickly found a nice use of a visual snap journal for the cellphone camera. First, back in 2012 until early last year, I used the crappy 3MP of my cheapo phone. Upgraded twice and it's much more useful.

"A nice feature of the phones is that they are inconspicuous. So much that it lets me shoot scenes that I couldn't, wouldn't or shouldn't with a camera. I took a couple frames of a friend with my OM-1 (with Tri-X, carrying it daily now) and his reaction to the camera was much much different compared to the phones. Not just candids, when he was aware of being photographed his behavior was much different. Curious.

"In fact I'm going for exchange to Sweden later this year and I'm thinking of using the iPhone 6 as my sole digital camera. I can only imagine how happy I'd be if I had such a device 10 years ago at age 10. Just the camera and video and nothing else would be enough.

"The video...that stabilizer is black magic vodoo. Well, overall there is a lot of sotware voodoo that makes it a nice camera. But the IS made me shoot a lot much more video. Walkin'? No problem! Steadicam in your hands. Mike, try hyperlapse from instagram. Nice for making timelapses (I have lots of fun with it in the train and landscape).

"...And a couple of years ago I was a bit skeptical on phone photography. I am 20 now. By the way, this comment written in my iPhone 6."

Robert: "Most people taking photos with a cell phone are producing images that are better in almost every way than those produced by skilled amateurs on their high quality film cameras 30 years ago. The cell phone also offers possibilities that have created completely new markets where many of us traditionalists do not take part. When my daughter and I take our Labrador for a walk in the forest, she takes several 'snaps' which always make me think that I would have not been able to do better with my D800. Thus, I feel a point will be reached soon where sales fall and it will no longer be viable for the Nikons and the like to stay in business. I'm now looking forward to this as it might mean a return to my old film cameras. Using these wasn't just about taking photos, it was, in my case, as much about handling them and the non-instant approach."

Jon Falk:

"A real Photoshop wizard could do much better than I."

Sat.

[TOP takes the day off on Saturdays. We'll be back tomorrow afternoon—please come back and pay a visit then!

Have a nice weekend,

—Mike the Ed.]

Sony Full-Frame Lenses Hit the Pipeline

From the believe-it-only-when-you-see-it world of Sony comes another sign that the wide-ranging former world-bestriding giant really realizes it needs to get serious about lens lines (comma, yay). Four beautiful new full-frame lenses for full-frame Sony E-mount are available for pre-order and thus are, to all appearances, um, real.

The four are the Sony Zeiss Distagon T* FE 35mm ƒ/1.4 ZA ($1,598); the Sony FE 90mm ƒ/2.8 Macro G OSS ($1,098); the Sony FE 24–240mm ƒ/3.5–6.3 OSS, ($998); and the Sony FE 28mm ƒ/2 ($448), for which eventually there will be two matching wide-angle converters, one for 21mm-e and one a fisheye.

A curious side-note about the 35mm ƒ/1.4 (pictured) is that there seems to be almost a genetic link to an ancient Zeiss C/Y strategy. In 1972 when Zeiss entered into a cooperative agreement to make lenses for Yashica-built, Porsche-Design-designed cameras branded with the old Zeiss model name Contax, its strategy was to mimic Nikon's practice of making a more premium line of faster lenses (then preferred mainly by pros and well-heeled amateurs), and a slow, more compact, more affordable version in the same focal length for those who needed those properties. In the new fast 35mm and the existing ƒ/2.8 35mm lens, that old strategy has been duplicated duplicated.

About the new fast 35mm, let's take a look at a short comparison:

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm ƒ/1.4G (DSLR)

Elements: 10
Weight: 601 g (21.2 oz.)
Length: 8.94 cm (3.52")
Filter size*: 67mm
Cost: $1,619

Sigma 35mm ƒ/1.4 DG HSM (DSLR)

Elements: 13
Weight: 665 g (23.46 oz.)
Length: 9.4 cm (3.7")
Filter size: 67mm
Cost: $899

Fujifilm XF 23mm ƒ/1.4 R (mirrorless)

Elements: 11
Weight: 301 g (10.6 oz.)
Length: 63mm (2.48")
Filter size: 62mm
Cost: $749

New Sony Zeiss Distagon T* FE 35mm ƒ/1.4 ZA (mirrorless)

Elements: 12
Weight: 630 g (22.2 oz.)
Length: 112mm (4.1")
Filter size: 72mm
Cost: $1,598

There are lots of reasons to buy a lens, and there are other parameters to look at (close-focusing distance, system considerations, weatherproofing, IS). But doesn't this kinda look like you're sacrificing TTL viewing and still having to buy a lens that's as big, as heavy, and as costly as the biggest, heaviest, and costliest DSLR lenses?

I guess everybody knows my current choice (Fuji), but I hafta say that APS-C and Micro 4/3 mirrorless certainly rationalize well as great compromises of competing factors**. Could be that's just me being a typical gearhead and self-approving my own choices post hoc; can't deny the possibility.

Mike

*Indicates approximate size of objective (outermost element)

**Granted this doesn't make the Sony A7 II look any less like catnip to this cat. Even so, I think my next camera will be this one, as a backup/second body to my present one.

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Gordon Lewis (partial comment): "...There may be a lot of Sony A7-series owners who bought them less because of their small size than for their relative affordability as compared to other FF cameras. There are photographers for whom nothing matters more than having the highest spec lenses available, regardless of size or cost."

[To see the full text of partial comments, please see the Comments Section. —Ed.]

Patrick Perez: "Duplicated duplicated? I don't know whether to respond 'You can say that again' or 'I see what you did there.'"

Dennis (partial comment): "Personally, I'm very interested in the 28mm ƒ/2 for my A6000. The old Minolta 28mm ƒ/2 was my favorite lens when I was shooting A mount (K-M 7D and Sony A700) and before that, I really enjoyed a rangefinder with a 40mm ƒ/1.8. It's a little bigger than I'd like (I'd love a dedicated APS-C lens like the Samsung 30mm ƒ/2) but the focal length is ideal...."

Ben Shugart: "When Leica can build a 35mm ƒ/1.4 for the full-frame digital M at 320 g and a 56mm front element, what design elements of Sony E-mount cameras necessitate a 35mm ƒ/1.4 at 630 g and a 72mm filter thread? Does AF require that much weight in incremental mechanics?"

Mike adds: A fondness for large size is also a longtime tendency of Zeiss SLR lens designs. There have been many that were at or near the largest size and/or heaviness of their respective classes. Contax shooters were used to this.

Wayne: "It's odd, the direction the A7 has taken me. I have fallen in love with the thing because it has allowed me to use all the great old legacy glass I have. I have never had time to even consider the shortage of E mount glass. I mean, with the A7, I can now play around with the FD 85mm ƒ/1.2 on something other than the ancient F-1. The Sony/Zeiss 35mm ƒ/1.4 for $1,600?, can't I get the real Zeiss equivalent for about the same, and use it forever?....Pass it on to future generations for their enjoyment?

"The latest twist is that it has directed me back to Pentax. Now, everything can be viewed from a FF A7 angle: hey, if I don't like the camera, the glass will always work on the A7. Recent fire sale price on the K5II's was irresistable. Among other amazing stuff, I was able to purchase an ancient Pentax K mount M SMS 35–70mm ƒ/2.8–3.5 zoom (like new) for $150. It's nice. Real nice. I can use it on the K5II; or, if I want FF and EVF, it goes on the A7.

"I think I will pass on these new E mount lenses until the price drops. On second thought, maybe I will use the money to upgrade to the A7II, and gain the IS for all these old gems."

Alex Schorsch: "Sony have the best sensors in the business. Their glass is also better than the Canikon offerings. The FE 55mm ƒ/1.8 is considered to be a mini-Otus. This 35mm ƒ/1.4 Zeiss is already getting rave reviews—it will probably prove to be one of the best 35mm lenses in photographic history in terms of Bokeh and sharpness. If you don´t want heavy—then just buy the Zeiss Loxia line which is smaller and offers Zeiss quality in ƒ/2. I bought the Sony RX-1 and am blown away by the quality of the glass and sensor. Sony is one of the 'Big Three' now and are revolutionizing the game. I'm biding my time to buy into the A7 system. Waiting to see what the second generation A7r substitute will be like. Can't handle lugging my Canon equipment around anymore."

Random Snap: Ned Bunnell

Ned Bunnell, Repurposed baseball stadium, Osaka, Japan, 1991

-

Mike
(Original here. Thanks to Ned.)

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Peter Gilbert: "I believe this came about as a direct result of the major earthquake that struck the Osaka-Kobe region in the first part of the 1990s (I was in Japan the, but I can't remember the date offhand). So many houses were destroyed the authorities set up 'temporary' housing like what you see in this photo. But, the people relocated to these areas became close neighbors and resisted being resettled to permanent new housing."

Hudson: "Did some Goggling and found the story. The team was sold and moved to another city. The stadium was used to display model homes. It has since been torn down and replaced with a mall."

Mike replies: Figures. I like Peter's vision better—a tiny, quirky, but close micro-community in a little bubble inside the big city. Sigh.

Peter Gilbert adds: "On closer inspection I see Ned's image was shot in 1991, before the great Hanshin earthquake that I mentioned (which occurred in 1995), so although my previous comments about folks being relocated then resisting relocation are  true in general, this situation at the old Osaka stadium is obviously not one of those. Apologies for the error."

Ned Bunnell: "To provide some context for this photo, Osaka stadium was home to the Nankai Hawks baseball team. I remember the Hawks name because I bought caps for my boys and they were quite the curiosity item with all their friends. The Hawks were sold and moved to Fukuoka City in 1988 or 1989. Since the stadium was abandoned, the City of Osaka, working with a trade group, turned it into a giant outdoor home show with rows of various model homes from several construction companies.

"If I remember correctly, the houses were a failure, as most Japanese in the greater Osaka area were not interested in western style housing and the quality of construction was not up to their expectations. I think the stadium was finally demolished in the late '90s."

How To Write A Review (OT)

Photo: Instagram/@eec926

Ben Davis gives an object lesson in how to write a negative review that isn't mean, is entertaining to read, and makes a cogent meta-point along the way: "Ladies and Gentlemen, the Björk Show at MoMA Is Bad, Really Bad."

Samples, for those who prefer not to go read it:

"There's another creepy mannequin of Björk as a psychedelic Sherpa, from her 2007 Wanderlust video. There are many other creepy mannequins. Now that I think about it, this may be more of a show for fans of creepy mannequins than it is for fans of Björk."

"Once you have cleared a gallery, guards prevent you from going back, giving it the distinct feeling of being on a forced march through a prop closet."

Fun. (I like Artnet News, which is how I found this. You can subscribe to a daily or weekly newsletter. I should also say I was in love with Björk's darkling song "Human Behavior" a number of years back—no hate for her, although maybe visual art isn't her primary creative genius. Next Up at MoMA: David Byrne's album covers and big suits? Richard Gere's Tibetan photographs? Fingerpaint paintings Miley Cyrus makes with her tongue? C'mon, MoMA, take yourself seriously.)

Mike

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

No featured comments yet—please check back soon!

Quote o' the Day: Duane Michals

-

“Don’t try to be an artist. Find the thing within you that needs to be expressed. You might find it is art.”

—Duane Michals

-

Mike
(Thanks to Dave)

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Kenneth Tanaka: "Good quote! I met Duane Michals about 10 years ago. He impressed me as a very lovely, very animated, and very opinionated fellow. I can easily envision him saying this to someone. Of course there is one catch to this directive: what if you discover you've nothing to express?"

Mike replies: There must be worse fates than not being an artist.  :-)