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.
(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.'"
Might want to use Google to show the same thing. That site was trying to send my browser all over the web...
[Done, thanks --Mike]
Posted by: John Krumm | Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 09:38 PM
I don't get it... As in I think they are a couple beers short of a 6-pack...
I suppose it has some meaning, hopefully to them, but I still don't understand why you would literally want to make a permanent deformity of one of your vital organs.
IMHO
Posted by: Jim in Denver | Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 09:57 PM
Hmmm...I ran into a lot of Leica aficionados at the grand opening of the Leica Store the other night, and I don't recall any of them sporting Leica tattoos.
If I ever get a tattoo, it will probably be a simple Latin translation of "It seemed like a good idea at the time."
Posted by: Chuck Albertson | Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 10:10 PM
I thought about getting some ink to better connect with the young people I work with so I went to the local tatoo parlor and asked what would work on me.
The lady looked me over and said "best if used before 1978".
This whole Rollei thing is making me sad. I have a 2.8f that I bought in the early 70's. Still pull a roll or two a year through it just because it makes me happy. I suppose you don't need much more reason than that.
Posted by: mike plews | Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 11:50 PM
I like it - though I think I would have picked the MX myself.
Oh, and literally, you forearm is not a vital organ, even if you're a photographer.
Posted by: Nigel | Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 06:32 AM
It bothers me more and more to see the young cover themselves with aggressive tatooing, especially young women. As someone with an extensive port wine stain birthmark that has gotten even uglier over the years (although thank god it's not over my face), it boggles my mind that someone would willfully cover themselves with something akin to what I would be so happy to get rid of, even at my age.
[Hey Tex, BRO. I have a large port wine stain birthmark as well, also not on my face. Covers half of my right hand and arm and parts of my shoulder and chest. I participate in the Vascular Birthmark Foundation (VBF), most of the activities of which are centered around helping kids with birthmarks. The biggest "stains" are psychological, as you and I well know. --Mike]
Posted by: tex andrews | Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 09:36 AM
"Permanent reminder of a temporary feeling" J. Buffett
Posted by: russell jacobs | Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 10:54 AM
That's nice, Mike, but check out this one:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/attachments/leica-m7-mp-film-m/464633d1414367851-i-love-my-m6-vinny-tattoo.jpg
Posted by: John | Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 12:04 PM
Obviously Lotte has an eye for photography... in the middle of her forehead.
Posted by: Olivier Anthony | Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 12:23 PM
If she is studying digital photography, why did she get a tattoo showing an analog camera???
[See the link. --Mike]
Posted by: Dave Rudin | Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 12:31 PM
I got a similar tattoo, but after doing a Pentax K1000 on one forearm and a Nikon FM2 on the other, I ran out of room to upgrade to a Leica. I actually, wound up having the Leica M5 tattooed directly over my left eye (as I am left-eye dominant). You can imagine what problems the digital "revolution" has caused -- in a few short years upgrading from a Canon Digital Rebel to a Canon 5D to a Nikon D3 has really made a mess of my face and arms. I had only just healed from the last upgrade before I had to go for laser removal and re-inking. On the plus side, I had a Domke F3 bag inked across my backside, and as I have aged it has enlarged all on its own and is now large enough to fit my LF gear. Now let me tell you about my zoom lens [/satire off]
Posted by: Benjamin Marks | Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 01:08 PM
Odd auction items, apart from the high precision metrology equipment going for scarp-metal, seemed to include a locked room and a locked safe both with "contents unknown" !!
The site location is five hours away from me. If it was closer I might be tempted to make a visit for some of the general purpose items.
Posted by: MartinP | Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 01:46 PM
"Who cares any more if your film work is "sharp"?"
I do.
"I'd rather have it look more like film."
So would I. Which, in my case, means sharp contact prints. :-)
Posted by: Sal Santamaura | Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 07:35 PM
Mike,
Your reply to Mr. Guarini sparkles me. I started to use last year old lenses on my Monochrom. I have contemporary asph 35 and 50, but I do prefer 40 years old lenses, with all the full aperture vigneting and softness.
Go figure.
Posted by: Pierre Charbonneau | Monday, 16 March 2015 at 09:27 AM
I like the comment about sharpness: I have an MX with a Tessar lens and it has wonderful qualities. It's actually pretty sharp, at least in the center, but the overall look is very pleasant.
Also like the photo of Lotte; my eyes are drawn more to her smile than the tattoo and the arm in front of her eyes creates a nice aura of mystery. Surprising qualities for a documentary photo.
Posted by: Oskar Ojala | Monday, 16 March 2015 at 05:37 PM
"Most people react really enthusiastic about this tattoo, especially other photographers..."
Posted by: Nigel | Tuesday, 17 March 2015 at 01:38 AM
I didn't see Lotte's phone number anywhere in this post!
Posted by: Marty | Thursday, 19 March 2015 at 10:25 PM