Thambar-Crazy

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I often feel uncomfortable when comparing lens effects with paintings.

 

There are so many differences between the two media that any similarities are likely at best to be coincidental and at worst pastiche.

I agree. I was being provocative. 

But I remain to be convinced that it is the Thambar that makes it better suited to B&W, rather than the photographer's abilities to compose in colour.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[wattsy]

I often feel uncomfortable when comparing lens effects with paintings.

 

There are so many differences between the two media that any similarities are likely at best to be coincidental and at worst pastiche.

 

 

I think the point was more about debunking the idea that a "blurry" picture might be better suited to black and white than suggesting that Impressionism and the Thambar have anything much in common.

 

I'm not sure I share your discomfort.

[Peter H]

I think the point was more about debunking the idea that a "blurry" picture might be better suited to black and white than suggesting that Impressionism and the Thambar have anything much in common.

 

I'm not sure I share your discomfort.

 

 

Well you should!

[schattenundlicht]

I am very happy (and so is my bank account) that Leica sometimes produces very expensive items, that I do not have the slightest inclination to acquire

 

I am grateful (no irony here!) for those of you who share their efforts of making this lens work. It does not work for me, however, and I appreciate the opportunity to come to this conclusion without actually buying this, er a bit too special, special lens.

 

Most images give me the impression that a technically defective lens has been employed, or that something has gone terribly wrong in the darkroom (or lightroom, that is). Those images that explicitly cry out „Thambar“ can be viewed by me only for the shortest glimpse without causing discomfort.

 

The only one who, somehow, seems to have mastered this gross lens consistently is Milan imho, however, to be honest, I do get bored rather fast by what to me looks a bit too much like a local historic society re-enacting some piece of days gone by.

 

I do wish everybody well with their Thambars, it seems to induce a playful spirit - and please do not take any offence where, honestly, none was intended.

 

Kind regards

Mathias

Edited April 6, 2018 by schattenundlicht

[Exodies]

A discomfort shared is a discomfort halved

[LocalHero1953]

Wouldn't it be terrible if we all liked the same things, or saw the same things in an image.

 

Though I do find it strange that people spend their leisure time looking at images that give them discomfort. Masochism has never been my thing, though.

Edited April 6, 2018 by LocalHero1953

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wouldn't it be terrible if we all liked the same things, or saw the same things in an image.

 

Though I do find it strange that people spend their leisure time looking at images that give them discomfort. Masochism has never been my thing, though.

 

 

 

It's absolutely not masochism Paul!

 

I've definitely learned more about art and photography from paying attention to things I initially didn't like than I have from things I liked straight away. I quite often change my mind over time, as well. And it's always interesting, to me anyway, to try to understand what it is that other people like about things that I don't. I may be missing out on something, I may have things to learn about the subject (certainly true!), or I may just learn something about other people even if it has no effect on my taste.

 

For all these reasons I like looking at most photos whether I like them or not, and particularly when I know at least a little bit about the people who've taken them.

[albertknappmd]

I am very happy (and so is my bank account) that Leica sometimes produces very expensive items, that I do not have the slightest inclination to acquire

 

I am grateful (no irony here!) for those of you who share their efforts of making this lens work. It does not work for me, however, and I appreciate the opportunity to come to this conclusion without actually buying this, er a bit too special, special lens.

 

Most images give me the impression that a technically defective lens has been employed, or that something has gone terribly wrong in the darkroom (or lightroom, that is). Those images that explicitly cry out „Thambar“ can be viewed by me only for the shortest glimpse without causing discomfort.

 

The only one who, somehow, seems to have mastered this gross lens consistently is Milan imho, however, to be honest, I do get bored rather fast by what to me looks a bit too much like a local historic society re-enacting some piece of days gone by.

 

I do wish everybody well with their Thambars, it seems to induce a playful spirit - and please do not take any offence where, honestly, none was intended.

 

Kind regards

Mathias

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinions.....

 

I would simply state that we are just beginning to use the new Thambar tool and that it will take time to master the lens and understand how light, color and other variables affect the final picture.

 

I feel that it is too early to condemn a process that will take months or more to come to fruition. 

 

Sit back and watch the pictures and techniques evolve in time.

 

Albert       

[ianman]

The only one who, somehow, seems to have mastered this gross lens consistently is Milan imho, 

 

Absolutely. But I think Milan has been using a Thambar for a very long time and has gained a lot of experience. I think that in time, you will see that this lens is far from being a one trick pony.

[Ouroboros]

Any Thambar & film users here?  Serious question out of genuine interest.

 

If anyone could post a link to Thambar/film users somewhere, it would be appreciated.  Thanks.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Ouroboros

[ianman]

At some point soon I will be combining the two. I think the learning process is going to be easier with the obvious advantages of digital.

[dkCambridgeshire]

There's an original Thambar currently listed at £1249 by a London dealer  … but has scratched and marked optics and no filters. 

 

dunk 

[Simon]

Has anyone posted pics of the Thambar with MM1 or 2? It seems the Monochrom would be a good partner to this lens.

[Milan_S]

All my photos were done with the MM1 

 

Has anyone posted pics of the Thambar with MM1 or 2? It seems the Monochrom would be a good partner to this lens.

[Michael Hiles]

B&W photography is just a historical accident that demonstrates the limitations of primitive technology and our limitations as artists.

Now, where's my steel helmet?

 

And your track shoes. 

[mdemeyer]

OK, so it's not taken with a Thambar, but my daughter sent me this self-portrait she did for a project where she selected "1930's Hollywood Glamour" as her theme.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

As a Dad who seems to have passed down some photo genes - and as someone who appreciates Milan's series with the Thambar - I couldn't resist sharing.

[dkCambridgeshire]

OK, so it's not taken with a Thambar, but my daughter sent me this self-portrait she did for a project where she selected "1930's Hollywood Glamour" as her theme.

 

 

As a Dad who seems to have passed down some photo genes - and as someone who appreciates Milan's series with the Thambar - I couldn't resist sharing.

 

 

But which lens / camera was used for this Thambaresque portrait? 

 

dunk 

Edited April 11, 2018 by dkCambridgeshire

[M9reno]

OK, so it's not taken with a Thambar, but my daughter sent me this self-portrait she did for a project where she selected "1930's Hollywood Glamour" as her theme.

 

Cheryl Smaller.JPG

 

As a Dad who seems to have passed down some photo genes - and as someone who appreciates Milan's series with the Thambar - I couldn't resist sharing.

It's very good as it goes (whichever camera and lens made it), but in my opinion shows why a lens like the Thambar is superior for making this kind of picture, where you need all possible flaws in the skin to disappear behind the gentle veil of intentionally induced aberrations.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Milan_S]

Thank you for appreciating my work! 

OK, so it's not taken with a Thambar, but my daughter sent me this self-portrait she did for a project where she selected "1930's Hollywood Glamour" as her theme.

 

Cheryl Smaller.JPG

 

As a Dad who seems to have passed down some photo genes - and as someone who appreciates Milan's series with the Thambar - I couldn't resist sharing.

[mdemeyer]

Agree, it does show what’s not there with a normal lens. And she didn’t make an attempt to smooth things out in the processing. Just worked with her lighting.

 

Camera and lens? A Pentax K100D APSC DSLR with the kit zoom lens.

 

Thanks for allowing the diversion. :-)

 

It's very good as it goes (whichever camera and lens made it), but in my opinion shows why a lens like the Thambar is superior for making this kind of picture, where you need all possible flaws in the skin to disappear behind the gentle veil of intentionally induced aberrations.