Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Self portrait 1973  (Read 3718 times)

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Self portrait 1973
« on: December 19, 2017, 06:01:29 pm »

This is me in my first  semester at Pratt Institute...with my seminal camera.

Peter

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #1 on: December 19, 2017, 06:14:23 pm »

... before you grew the beard so you could make your own paint brushes.   ;)
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #2 on: December 19, 2017, 08:17:44 pm »

Rollei 35.

My first camera. Still have it.

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #3 on: December 19, 2017, 09:28:32 pm »

... before you grew the beard so you could make your own paint brushes.   ;)

You bet...

Peter

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #4 on: December 19, 2017, 09:29:40 pm »

Rollei 35.

My first camera. Still have it.

I still have mine...and functional too.

Peter
« Last Edit: December 19, 2017, 09:33:12 pm by petermfiore »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #5 on: December 20, 2017, 04:15:05 am »

Must have been keen - still in your pyjamas! What time was it?

;-)

Rob

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2017, 05:24:58 am »

Must have been keen - still in your pyjamas! What time was it?

;-)

Rob
I'm sure it's somewhere between 3 and 5 AM. My usual bedtime in art school. 17 years old. Is anybody really that young?

Peter
« Last Edit: December 20, 2017, 05:53:08 am by petermfiore »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2017, 07:42:40 am »

I'm sure it's somewhere between 3 and 5 AM. My usual bedtime in art school. 17 years old. Is anybody really that young?

Peter

No, not anymore. They are all at least seventeen-going-on-thirty, especially the girls, even at fourteen. Not that I know any fourteen-year-olds anymore. Mine all grew up to be mid-twenties right away.

It's something to do with relativity and a short formula I no longer recall. It was something like: Excitement=MyCubalibreSquared. But you know how it goes with us folks with too many pictures in our heads... uncertainty and anxiety camouflaged as wild assurance.

:-(

Rob

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #8 on: December 20, 2017, 08:20:27 am »

... uncertainty and anxiety camouflaged as wild assurance.

:-(

Rob

Ah, there are liquid consumable balms for that too...

:~)

Peter
« Last Edit: December 20, 2017, 09:21:18 am by petermfiore »
Logged

Michael West

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1438
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #9 on: December 20, 2017, 06:19:26 pm »

That looks suspiciously like Peter Max wallpaper.
Logged

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #10 on: December 20, 2017, 06:26:14 pm »

That looks suspiciously like Peter Max wallpaper.

If only...Very bad suburban, couldn't afford to change it, garbage...

Peter
« Last Edit: December 22, 2017, 05:02:33 am by petermfiore »
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #11 on: December 23, 2017, 01:50:50 am »

Rollei 35.

My first camera. Still have it.

Mine too. I'm looking at it now as it sits on a shelf. I kept that camera in my pocket for six or seven years. I love the 40mm f/3.5 Tessar.
Logged

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #12 on: December 23, 2017, 05:22:50 am »

Mine too. I'm looking at it now as it sits on a shelf. I kept that camera in my pocket for six or seven years. I love the 40mm f/3.5 Tessar.

Bob,

I carried that all thru my 4 years at Pratt and for several years after that...I love that camera.

Peter

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #13 on: December 23, 2017, 02:35:14 pm »

Bob,

I carried that all thru my 4 years at Pratt and for several years after that...I love that camera.

Peter



I think I'll make myself a promise right here and now. If I do get back to live in Britain I will make a basic darkroom simply to process film, which means a new life for the F3. My scanner still works - at least, it did last time I used it - but I won't be printing wet again, much as I loved it. Never say never...

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #14 on: December 23, 2017, 02:50:22 pm »




I think I'll make myself a promise right here and now. If I do get back to live in Britain I will make a basic darkroom simply to process film, which means a new life for the F3. My scanner still works - at least, it did last time I used it - but I won't be printing wet again, much as I loved it. Never say never...
My Nikon scanner works as well and I still have my film reels and tanks. Hmmmm...Rollei may breathe again.

Peter

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #15 on: December 23, 2017, 03:56:01 pm »

You guys are making me nostalgic for standing at the sink with a stainless steel 35mm tank full of Microdol.

But then I remember what a pain in the posterior all that was, with dark-bags and the rest of the paraphernalia, and the washing and the cleanups and how inflexible the results were in comparison with digital.

Quick! Back to Photoshop!
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #16 on: December 23, 2017, 04:06:36 pm »

You guys are making me nostalgic for standing at the sink with a stainless steel 35mm tank full of Microdol.

But then I remember what a pain in the posterior all that was, with dark-bags and the rest of the paraphernalia, and the washing and the cleanups and how inflexible the results were in comparison with digital.

Quick! Back to Photoshop!

That's why I won't go back...the worst part of darkroom work was film development. Most important, but boring. Those 10-15 minutes seemed like hours to me back then. However printing was where the magic was. Special developers, hot developer painted on with a brush to make the lighter parts of the print come alive in a timely fashion.
Printing, I miss...very hands on.

Peter
« Last Edit: December 23, 2017, 04:41:56 pm by petermfiore »
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #17 on: December 23, 2017, 04:09:24 pm »

Quick! Back to Photoshop!
'Cause it's so nice and easy!   :D

The closest I'll ever get to the wet darkroom again is possibly keeping a tray of stop bath next to my PC, just for the nostalgic aroma.

Eric

P.S. Film development became tolerable when I began to treat it as time to meditate.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #18 on: December 24, 2017, 04:39:58 pm »

There was nothing difficult about processing film. It was just routine and a rather dull but essential step en route to the next bit, which was the aesthetic challenge.

I have never used a changing bag in my life and would have hated to try that. Especially as I seldom processed a single film at a time. Probably need a changing tent!

I always liked a lot of space around me in the dark, where I knew exactly where I'd put everything so as for it to be conveniently to hand. Imagine knocking over a spìral and then wondering where the eff the damned thing had rolled! Nope, a room that I can darken every time. Processing you can do anywhere with water and a flat surface that doesn't scream if you wet it. Your kitchen would be perfect.

Contact prints are the bugger because they need a darkroom just as much as prints. Which is why I'd be happier with chromes. Trying to edit negatives is for anyone else but me. I need positives.

But be that as it may, since this is about selfies, here's an old one. I bet Ms Coke had no idea I was sneaking into shot!



If I may refer back to Alan G's post, and his link to music photographer Neal Preston: in the interview Preston tells us that he would far rather edit multiple films via contacts than digital via the computer. He reckons it would take a quarter of the time a computer would force him to spend. He does use digital cameras too, so he knows what he's talking about. Anyway, from my perspective, I would far rather edit a few hundred trannies on a big lightbox than attempt to do it on a screen. The ease with which you can rapìdly swap shots around, create groups and edit them down further can't be matched by computers and keyboards and stuff. Some things work best hands on. Of course, this is just opinion, and as we know, everybody has 'em, and if you are working in digital, it's all entirely academic anyhow. ;-)

Where I think the computer wins, hands down, is in the case of short shoots, where you are doing one basic shot and just want to find your best exposure/lighting. Fantastic option to have. Even the iPad does that well!

Rob
« Last Edit: December 24, 2017, 04:43:21 pm by Rob C »
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Self portrait 1973
« Reply #19 on: December 24, 2017, 04:44:53 pm »

That's why I won't go back...the worst part of darkroom work was film development. Most important, but boring. Those 10-15 minutes seemed like hours to me back then. However printing was where the magic was. Special developers, hot developer painted on with a brush to make the lighter parts of the print come alive in a timely fashion.
Printing, I miss...very hands on.

Peter

I agree, Peter. I remember the first time I saw that magical print come up in the developer. It always was magic, partly because the print was like a birth. It presented itself a bit at a time. With digital the print is full-born at first sight. I can live with that, but some of the magic is gone.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up