notes for later

an early career like a stone skipping across the raging river.. and gone.
they would influence the weak rather than turn out a rough weeks wages.
now that it is easy to get sharp focus, clear wide tone exposure and brilliant color range, most seek to compete with bigger prints, more capture points. most photographers lack conceptual skill, their camera is sharper than their mind. finger too slow to know what, just when.

One of the best photographers. Too bad I speak no Czech. Have loved his work for decades.

Does the speed you work at make your work better or worse?

Many film based photographers claim, along with their “alt” printers, that slower makes better photographs. That digital, since it is so easy, so quick, it is necessarily bad. Many is less. Slower makes better imagery.

What proof, or demonstration do they offer? Maybe the argument means they don’t have to produce as much. They get to spend more time in chat rooms and less time photographing.

I suppose they’ve never considered that in the days of film, that 35mm shooters heard the same thing from 8×10 users. That is, that 35 made lousy pictures therefore made lousy photographers. I used both, almost daily. During those times I used to remark that I often shot 35 to use less film. That 8×10 used as much film for One shot as 35 mm did to make 36 shots. This meant that using 35 I could become at least 36 times better a photographer than when I was using an 8×10.

It didn’t seem to sink in.