1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

oh it's so NOT about the gear...

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by kevinparis, Dec 21, 2014.

  1. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    • Like Like x 22
  2. Ricoh

    Ricoh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    906
    Nov 2, 2013
    UK
    Steve
    Impressive work indeed!
    I wonder if she deliberately printed 'Batley' with the horizontal wonky (or had it done for her, at Boots, maybe :))?
     
  3. JoFT

    JoFT Mu-43 Veteran

    360
    Nov 11, 2014
    Stuttgart
    Johannes
  4. Mellow

    Mellow Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2010
    Florida or Idaho
    Tom
    Wow, so good. "American tourists in London" is my favorite from this collection . . . stupendous!
     
  5. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    I love this quote about photographing Bertrand Russell. “I was terrified, I don’t think I even knew who he was,” she said. “But the light was good ...”
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    Kevin, it's almost never about the gear if you are good. And Jane was way more than good.

    But for many of us (and I'm near the top of the list) it is about the gear, lest we blame ourselves for poor images. :) I'm half joking...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Ricoh

    Ricoh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    906
    Nov 2, 2013
    UK
    Steve
    Whether she 'shot' with modern kit, such as a Mirrorless, I don't know, but it would be interesting to see the results.
    To a first approximation, the less complex the camera the results are generally better; less time pondering what to do with the computer in the shape of a camera, more time contemplating the composition, the lighting, the exposure. And no lcd means no chimping, which isn't a bad thing. Just wait for the proofs.
     
  8. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I fail to see how this proves it is not about the gear. She was always using a respectable camera, good film and a fast prime lens. Excellent choices for the job and similar to the level of gear we often discuss here on this site.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    Her gear was good enough for the job. The Olypus 85/2 is a decent lens. I used it extensively in the 80's and 90's. Wide open it's similar in performance to the 17/2.8. The 100/2 and 100/2.8 were both better.

    Instead of better gear or the best gear her focus was on the light and a moment of honesty.

    Fred
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    Tell me about it! Now that each of my 6x7 shots costs ~$2.50 after developing and scanning, you better believe I'm not wasting one unless I'm loving the light! Unless, of course, I forget to take off the lens cap. The joy of rangefinders...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Ricoh

    Ricoh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    906
    Nov 2, 2013
    UK
    Steve
    I certainly know if I've left the lens cap on with my RF, the light meter reading is a dead give away!
     
  12. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    Thank you for sharing that link, fantastic life's work.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    Two out of my three rf's don't have (functioning) light meters :(
    Fred
     
  14. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    Well aren't you fancy, a camera with a light meter, and TTL metering at that... ;)
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. gr6825

    gr6825 Mu-43 Veteran

    277
    Oct 10, 2012
    These are amazing. Love the Bob Hope portrait.
     
  16. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    From what I understand from the 70's till her passing she used for her work almost exclusively an OM-1 and a 85/2.... thats it! ...

    I bet she never read a lens review in her life, or switched systems in search of some perceived improvement or for that matter ever visited a camera shop or a photo show.

    She found the tool that allowed her to work and create the images she wanted. It was the images that were important, not how they were captured.

    Its my observation that a lot of people who talk on forums like this about the minutae of differing gear tend to be the ones who post the least actual images.

    To me the quality of an image as a final piece is way way more important than the 'image quality' of the tool used to capture that image

    thats just my opinion.... its worth as much as you paid for it :)

    K

    PS there is a documentary out there which I have yet to get hold of

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/vid...r-light-jane-bown-film-you-should-watch-video
     
  17. Lawrence A.

    Lawrence A. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 14, 2012
    New Mexico
    Larry
    I certainly agree that the gear is just a tool. I'm glad she found a tool that worked for her, but I suspect she'd have produced excellent photographs no matter what she was using. As I long time OM-1 user, I of course applaud her choice of 35mm cameras. Never could afford that 85mm f2, dammit.
     
  18. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I get what you are saying, but it was still quality gear. So it wasn't about the gear after she found a good quality setup that met her needs. I doubt she'd have traded you for a Kodak Instamatic for an important shoot.
     
  19. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    She used good quality gear because she was a professional , and dependable gear was essential to her job

    I reckon if she had only had access to an Instamatic for a shoot she would still have achieved an image of quality

    K
     
  20. manju69

    manju69 Mu-43 Veteran

    493
    Jul 1, 2011
    Stroud, UK
    Pete
    Thanks - great work. It is a great reminder to me about simplicity. One camera, one lens.

    Perhaps it works to say, it's not all about the gear but the gear can play a significant part - sometimes more, sometimes less significant... I can definitely put way too much emphasis on it.