Going philosophically deeper into photography, I have been mentally begged for an answer to the question of how to render the aesthetical image in my eyes by way of the sequential interpretation of the camera and lens. I mean, how a scene appeals to us depends on, first and foremost, our emotional state while to the lens and digital sensor the logical result of a series of calculation. In between the two is a rift to be bridged through all sorts of techniques and understanding in the art of photography. But is that a sufficient reply? Is there anything that the photographer has to build up in himself, in his eyes and soul in relation to the people and the world around so that his images can fully connect the viewers to the alpha and omega of what and how he sees the scene at the decisive moment? If yes, how? If no, why?
Thursday, 7 November 2013
Tuesday, 5 November 2013
Monday, 4 November 2013
The two-year-old Leica X1 is the most endearing among my photographic gear. Yes, it is truly sluggish in focusing but for those who appreciate it, the philosophy behind the X1 is actually pure photography, to steal from Nikon. It slows you down which in turns begs you to think and observe before snapping a shot, resting on the photographer rather than the electronics to take control of the result. The joy overflown from using this aesthetically equally brilliant machine is for a large part the result of such slowness. With the X1, I have even found myself walking at more leisurely pace to observe because I couldn't just snap snap snap anyway. The fixed Elmarit lens is also very loving. It was built to do what it does best, sharp images with a "3D-ish" appeal. Today's photos in reduced size surely don't do justice to what high quality images the lens can produce. I should have been more generous to post some full-size images here.