amerix
1537
beautiful pictures of an admirable watch
May 29, 2012,10:28 AM
Gary - you have really got it down!
This is the difference between depth & feeling vs. crisp & contrasty.
In some way it reminds me of a superior portrait lens, an old Leica Summicron f:50 mm connected to an M3 or whatever bayonette its followers could take.
Even though f:90 to f:110 work better for head shots.
Later they made it crisp & contrasty, as did Zeiss for their Contax models - their earlier lenses were also a dream of soft resolution, often exceeding the capacity of the photograpic materials avaiable then - and later for Nikon and the other brands that soon followed from Japan.
These optical constructions were not intended for reflex cameras, and unavailable to the general public in pre-war times.
Crisp & Contrasty were better suited for reproduction in the printed media of the time, as well as Kodachrome for dias, than for hand-made prints from a darkroom, pressed by myself from materials that contained no plastic. That is passion!
Rather than being well aware of the fact that the old days are gone forever - and trying to come to terms with digital photograpy - I much prefer to enjoy your photos of a very nice watch!
With "depth of field" - depth of feel?
amerix
This message has been edited by amerix on 2012-05-29 10:55:30