Guest stnami Posted June 17, 2008 Share #301 Posted June 17, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) No anger here sport, no ignorance, just cannot see why western middle class values are overprotected above others................. the topic is about photography, that is the process of obtaining these type of images, if you must run off then do so... no value having someone half hearted continuing ,I bid thee farewell Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 17, 2008 Posted June 17, 2008 Hi Guest stnami, Take a look here M8 Iraq field test - ouch.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wattsy Posted June 17, 2008 Share #302 Posted June 17, 2008 Let's have some respect for people who dare to present us, in our cosseted Western privileged lives, with a reality that we'd rather avert our eyes from, and which we are not in any way brave enough to witness for ourselves. Yes, Kamber is clearly a talented photographer but I'm not sure how close this white, middle class New Yorker gets us to the "reality" you mention. The truth? It strikes me that, like many photojournalists, he's really looking for Mr Kurtz. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted June 17, 2008 Share #303 Posted June 17, 2008 As long as there continue to be wars there will be war photographers. Don't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the message. They didn't start it, they can't end it, they are there to record. Yes, it may involve a certain amount of machismo to do what they do. Of course everyone is free to ignore and not look at their pics. Out of sight, out of mind. That's what I do with macro flower pics but I don't condemn those photogs for peddling in schmaltz. There's photographers of everything that happens on this planet. Just the way it is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted June 17, 2008 Share #304 Posted June 17, 2008 .....good to see the thread on track and about photography:) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 17, 2008 Share #305 Posted June 17, 2008 .....good to see the thread on track and about photography:) I thought it was about the M8? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted June 17, 2008 Share #306 Posted June 17, 2008 As long as there continue to be wars there will be war photographers. Don't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the message. They didn't start it, they can't end it, they are there to record. Yes, it may involve a certain amount of machismo to do what they do. Of course everyone is free to ignore and not look at their pics. Out of sight, I 'enjoy' a bit of war photography as much as the next person but it is foolish to think that such photography is anything like a record of the truth. We all have pre-conceived ideas, prejudices, etc. and it is inevitable that these influence the creative choices any photographer makes. All photography (be it war, wedding, architectural - whatever) is a form of propaganda. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted June 17, 2008 Share #307 Posted June 17, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) When the reliability, responsiveness and speed of the M8 is called into question I often see this red herring waved around (if that's what one does with herrings?). I can't remember seeing Michael Kamber say that he wants autofocus or that he wants the M8 to work "the same way" as a DSLR - or any of the other bells and whistles that people hold up as gimmicks to easily knock down, even though no-one wants them on an M-camera (smile-recognition anyone?) What Kamber wants (as far as I can see) is a digital M that is as reliable and responsive as other digital cameras; a sensor that doesn't reduce high ISO images to a mush of unusable soft banded noise; and a camera worthy of it's heritage. Incidentally, are you guys seriously suggesting that the M8 is really weather-sealed? Oh and by the way - the amazing and moving images (sometimes of a horror that we can barely comprehend - such as the freshly cut-off head of a Monrovian rebel) surely deserve better than the patronizing comments we're hearing here. Let's have some respect for people who dare to present us, in our cosseted Western privileged lives, with a reality that we'd rather avert our eyes from, and which we are not in any way brave enough to witness for ourselves. 1) we were talking about the M8 review and not about what the work of war reporters deserves (and here I suggest that everbody decides for himselves what he is brave for or not or what can be seen as being brave or not); 2) responsiveness: As long as one does not take many images in continous mode, the M8 is still one of the most responsive cameras I know. Shutter lag is nearly non existant. So again, I dont understand this issue 3) High ISO...sorry, with all respect I did not find the 640ISO images he shows to be exposed correct; There are other cameras like a 5d or d3 which are clearly better above 640 ISO, but to say the M8 delievers only mushy high ISO results does not reflect reality. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 17, 2008 Share #308 Posted June 17, 2008 Well, as it is clear that 307 posts can be summarized in three concise paragraphs, I suggest we call it a day and close this thread.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 17, 2008 Share #309 Posted June 17, 2008 Actually it can probably be sumarised as "He didn't like the camera, other people do". Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted June 17, 2008 Share #310 Posted June 17, 2008 Well, as it is clear that 307 posts can be summarized in three concise paragraphs, I suggest we call it a day and close this thread.... Well as I disagree with those 3 paragraphs, and also as a cursory glance at the figures shows this thread is by far and away the most popular on the forum at the moment, I most humbly suggest we do NOT close it. I thought open discussion was the entire idea of such a forum. With your permission jaap. Incidentally Tom, regarding your point (1) as I very explicitly explained in another post above, I was not saying we should defer to Michael Kamber's opinion of the M8 because of his status as war correspondent, I was taking exception to the fact that some people in this thread have occasionally (implicitly) poked fun at his work in order to undermine that opinion. Which I felt was beneath this forum. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 17, 2008 Share #311 Posted June 17, 2008 Of course we should have the right to poke fun at photographers. Whether it's right to do so as a way of undermining something else they are saying is a different matter. Can't say I've read too 'poking fun' in this particular thread, though perhaps there'll be a different response when Anne Geddes blogs her thoughts on the M8. What iritates a little is how one person's opinion (which is 100% valid for him) is taken to be some kind of universal truth. If he'd tried using a 10x8 camera in a war zone and mentioned how slow it was to load, the lack of in camera exposure, having to wear a cloth to focus etc., would we be arguing that large format is a waste of time for everyone else? I think not. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 17, 2008 Share #312 Posted June 17, 2008 With your permission jaap. Granted. Although it is not mine to grant. Actually I had a feeling my suggestion would not be taken.... I was taking exception to the fact that some people in this thread have occasionally (implicitly) poked fun at his work in order to undermine that opinion. Which I felt was beneath this forum. I would quite agree with you there, I think, however, that the distaste for (that) war has extended to the people that are associated with it. By instituting "embedded reporters" the US has cleverly dimished the status of just those whose job it is to expose the horrors. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted June 17, 2008 Share #313 Posted June 17, 2008 What iritates a little is how one person's opinion (which is 100% valid for him) is taken to be some kind of universal truth. Ah! Anything in writing many people take as universal truth. That is what religions, and media, thrive on! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
okram Posted June 17, 2008 Share #314 Posted June 17, 2008 There is also something with being negative about something makes you look smarter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leebert Posted June 17, 2008 Share #315 Posted June 17, 2008 Oh, and there's no place a post-modern, self-righteous cliche won't troll... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 17, 2008 Share #316 Posted June 17, 2008 ...If he'd tried using a 10x8 camera in a war zone and mentioned how slow it was to load, the lack of in camera exposure, having to wear a cloth to focus etc., would we be arguing that large format is a waste of time for everyone else? I think not. Yes, if he had been trying to cover action scenes in the war with a view camera your point would be valid. I think the major reason this thread has generated the attention it has is because people were surprised at how poorly Kamber felt the M8 did in this role. Not that he was trying to use the camera in a role for which it wouldn't be ideal. Why would anyone think the M8 is the wrong camera for this type of work? And what is the right type of work for the M8? (I used to shoot with several different film camera formats and now I do all of my work with one digital camera system. Is that wrong?) If a photojournalist wrote a glowing report about the M8 would anyone say he/she is using the "wrong" camera? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 17, 2008 Share #317 Posted June 17, 2008 If a photojournalist wrote a glowing report about the M8 would anyone say he/she is using the "wrong" camera? Of course not. The point I'm trying to make is that he was using the wrong camera because it didn't fit _his_ needs in the particular situation he found himself in. Let's be honest, there aren't too many of us that ned to take the wearing of a flak jacket into account when choosing a camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted June 17, 2008 Share #318 Posted June 17, 2008 Let's be honest, there aren't too many of us that ned to take the wearing of a flak jacket into account when choosing a camera. Oh come on Steve - which particular characteristics of a flak jacket are the ones that inadvertently trigger the buttons on the back of the M8, as opposed to any other garment? As Alan pointed out, many other counter-arguments have cited war correspondents using the M8 with more success, and then yet others counter Kamber's arguments by saying that naturally the camera is the wrong one to take into a war zone. Also as you must realize, the large format camera analogy is obviously also a red herring. These arguments just have an absurd circularity to them. Again, as Kamber himself points out, his observations about the camera are his own, and he states explicitly in his introduction that many others are happy with the camera. But nonetheless his criticisms seem valid and interesting in general terms for all who are interested in the camera - including, I hope, Leica themselves. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted June 17, 2008 Share #319 Posted June 17, 2008 Wrong- photogs photos help end our Viet Nam thing. USAF 1970 I think most rational people would agree with you. I'm a bit surprised that a 'deep thinker' like Imants would suggest that war photos don't change anything. I don't think there are too many people who experienced the Vietnam era who were unaffected by Nick Ut's photo of the napalmed girl running down the road from her bombed village, or Eddie Adams' photo of the RVN officer blowing the brains out of a suspected Viet Cong captive, or the photos of bodies from the Mai Lai massacre lined up on the side of a dirt road, or the photos of dozens of flag draped coffins spread out like cordwood on the tarmack at the airfield near Saigon as "green" US Army replacements walked past them and into the war. These and the thousands of other images that came out of Vietnam dramatically altered public opinion and moved people in this country and others out of their living rooms and dorm rooms into the streets. The end result was a shortening of the conflict, probably by several years. War photographers don't glorify the killing and the fact that their images are sometimes artistic doesn't diminish their social value. On the contrary, these people play a crucial role in graphicly showing the public the horror and inhumanity of wars and the need to end them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted June 17, 2008 Share #320 Posted June 17, 2008 I think most rational people would agree with you. I'm a bit surprised that a 'deep thinker' like Imants would suggest that war photos don't change anything. I don't think there are too many people who experienced the Vietnam era who were unaffected by Nick Ut's photo of the napalmed girl running down the road from her bombed village, or Eddie Adams' photo of the RVN officer blowing the brains out of a suspected Viet Cong captive, or the photos of bodies from the Mai Lai massacre lined up on the side of a dirt road, or the photos of dozens of flag draped coffins spread out like cordwood on the tarmack at the airfield near Saigon as "green" US Army replacements walked past them and into the war. These and the thousands of other images that came out of Vietnam dramatically altered public opinion and moved people in this country and others out of their living rooms and dorm rooms into the streets. The end result was a shortening of the conflict, probably by several years. War photographers don't glorify the killing and the fact that their images are sometimes artistic doesn't diminish their social value. On the contrary, these people play a crucial role in graphicly showing the public the horror and inhumanity of wars and the need to end them. In 1970/71 I bought my first NikonF - some kind of support to this "unknown" brand in Germany and with great respect to war photographers in Vietnam at this time. Bernd Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.