"Picasso's Elephant"--Leica PAW, December 8th, 2001

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 04, 2001

Answers

ALFIE, please try to become sober again and don´t steal our tiime here.

You might risk somebody is sending the doctor to you soon ...

Nevertheless, best wishes

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), December 04, 2001.

Does anyone have a link for an abstract photo interpretation of

"Picasso Rolling in his Grave"?

-- jeremyT (jerthomas@earthlink.net), December 04, 2001.

Pointless. C'mon Alfie, if you're going to subject us to this stuff, at least have the pride in your work to get rid of the dust spots.......

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), December 04, 2001.

What's wrong with this guy? Can't he get a hint? Does he really think that this garbled piece of wall is art? Why oh why, I ask! It actually hurts to imagine what must go through this fellow's mind when he puts stuff like this up ... does he expect us to say "Wow, man, cool, beautiful ..."?

-- DH (Dhil@yahoo.com), December 04, 2001.

I agree about the dust spots and I think Alfie should show a little more restraint in sharing his experiments, however I think Alfie's showing a little creativity (more than most). If the picture had worked without the title, I would have been truly impressed.

-- Ron Buchanan (ronb@fusive.com), December 04, 2001.

If you are wanting a critique here, I have seen this shot done much better. You see, I am an insurance agent, and I see about 20 or 30 of these shots every year. They come in when folks are submitting insurance claims because their washing machine connection hose (always the HOT) burst and damaged their walls and floors. Usually, there is much better use of line and color than I see here. Shape and form come into play as most also have a water stain to add interest.

That being said, I must admit I've probably seen worse too, I just don't remeber them.

To improve on this shot, I would suggest you position the camera slightly left, and back up a bit to give the subject a better setting. ALso, use a fine grain film such as Velvia -- whatever you used is way too grainy. Take several shots from slightly different angles. Experiment with placing different fruits and vegetables into the image in varying positions -- perhaps under the hose or stuck onto the bibs. Have your new bride act as your assistant and direct her to point a light at varying angles to the subject. Select your best shot from the above examples, and re-post it (only one, please) so we may furhter critique your technique and comment on your progress and improvement as a photogrpher.

Cool beans,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), December 04, 2001.

This is the internet age. Everyone has an equal opportunity to post. OTOH everyone has an equal opportunity not to look. I think it's interesting how the same people who ask Alfie not to post or at least have some restraint are the people who cannot control themselves and keep looking and posting in reaction to his posts. I have less respect for those who keep looking then complain, then look again than complain again, then look again and keep complaining. IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM DON'T LOOK. I'ts simple. Alfie if you want keep posting. Like most of the other posts some of yours are interesting some not.

-- Gerry Widen (gwiden@alliancepartners.org), December 04, 2001.

Alfie:

Before I critique the picture, a plea. PLEASE don't post pictures so LARGE!! For Web viewing, unless you have a specific sharpness issue that needs fine detail, stick to a picture size of about 8" by 5-1/2" (or smaller!) at 72 dpi . It will take much less time to upload - and much less time for us to view. 30 seconds of staring at a section of yellow wall waiting for the rest of the picture to appear is enough to make anyone hate your work!!

Even if you are showing a focus problem (as in the questionable 'princess' shot you asked about last time - CROP the picture to show the problem area, but keep the blown-up section small enough to fit on the average (15") monitor all at once.

As to the picture itself - well, IF you were in photo school this would be 2nd semester work from a slightly above-average student. You're SEEING things - you just aren't seeing them well yet.

Jsut to keep you in good spirits, I went through 9 years of photo education. But MOST of what I learned beyond basic film processing and a few bits of trivia here and there (Zone system techniques, photo history) was self-taught simultaneously, by studying established work. You can learn a lot on your own by picking a photographer and working really hard to duplicate their vision (just like some painters start by copying masters.) Once you get the techniques under control THEN you have the tools to pursue your own vision. Even Picasso painted 'classically' until he knew what he was doing, and then took off from that base to reinvent painting and art for the 20th century.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), December 04, 2001.

Thanks for the advice about posting a smaller photographs. Typically I use the largest scan from the CBOP CD-ROM (I don't scan my own photographs because I don't have any room in my apartment) because I would like to have the Leica optics showing its maximum resolution at about 12 inches by 18 inches total.

Of course, I keep on forgetting that most people don't have a cable or T3 connection so I promise to post a medium sized photo instead.

About the photograph's background, this photo was influenced by a sculpture by Picasso where he used a toy car and embedded it into the head of a man and made the head of the figurine a monkey shape retouched with a brass color. It was a most emotional sculpture in my childhood and I decided to use the photograph from the springboard of cubist inspiration.

Of course, my artistic sense is drawn mostly towards pop art such as Lichtenstein. He is definitely one of my favorite painters along with Vermeer and Andy Warhol.

sincerely, Alfie

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 04, 2001.

Actually that reminds me, perhaps if I have any interest in pop art photography to "duplicate" Lichtenstein's artwork, I could try to experiment with Ilford Delta 3200. Good grain and noticeable which I like :)

Alfie

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 04, 2001.

Please, I beg of you, stop ... and see a therapist. You sound completely wacko ...

-- DH (Dhils@yahoo.com), December 04, 2001.

Alfie you are a genius! you have provided me with some of the most entertaining posts I have ever read.

Cool beans!

-- Hugh Jass (Cjass@hotmail.com), December 04, 2001.

I used to wonder why people didn't want the government supporting artists through grants... i no longer wonder.

-- Matthew Geddert (geddert@yahoo.com), December 04, 2001.

Here’s a summary of the 20 posts with the most recent responses (as of 12/4, 4pm MST USA)

Is this photo here a problematic picture? (51 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Appreciation of your advice... and my photography philosophy. (36 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Next Lens Advice (21 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Delta 4OO@8OO asa, problem (14 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Your expriences with 24/2.8 M lens (12 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) framelines in the m6 (12 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) "Picasso's Elephant"--Leica PAW, December 8th, 2001 (12 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Favorite M lenses for architecture; Collapsible 50 Elmar 2.8 (12 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Paucity of Leica FS in Newspaper Ads (11 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Another Leica forum ? (11 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) leica m loading (11 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Just tried new portraBW & M6 (10 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Comparison of some R medium teles (9 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Protecting M Top And Baseplate (8 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) scanner for b&w (6 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Is there a Leica M review web site? (5 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Any tips on focusing a R4 without the split-screen view screen? (4 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) scanners re-visited (4 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Metz 54MZ-3 (3 new answers, last on December 04, 2001) Opinions of Voigtlander Nokton 1.5/50mm lens? (2 new answers, last on December 04, 2001)

Alfie Wang has collected 103 responses to a total of 141 for everyone else.

Remember your John Ciardi - “A man is what he does with his attention.”

Or in other words, if you dislike Alfie’s posts so much, why are you spending so much time and energy here??

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), December 04, 2001.

I say again, as I did before my thread was removed, "Alfie's winning."

-- Max Wall (mtwall@earthlink.net), December 04, 2001.

Alfie is the best show in town bar none,net forum wise anyway. Compulsive viewing. I think i will stop giving good nature advice as it's unlikely to be heeded.

jasper

-- jasper (jtiong@rocketmail.com), December 04, 2001.

Max, Alfie is talking about photography, and you're talking about "winning" as if some kind of contest was occuring here. Did you by any chance happen to notice the name of this forum? Did you happen to notice that Alfie posted a link to a "photograph"? Did you happen to notice that Alfie is actually talking about photography? Did you happen to notice that Alfie uses "Leica" cameras?

What guidelines in my About section are not being followed by Alfie? What specific guidelines are you actually following in my About section when you write about "winning"? Where in my About section does it mention that you have to like everything Bob or Sue or Joe or Billy or Alfie posts to this forum? Where in the About section does it say that you have to read and enjoy every post? Am I making sense, or am I hallucinating? Somebody, please wake me up!

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@mail.com), December 04, 2001.

I love Alfie's posts! They're like having a scab and being unable to resist picking it or like switching channels during an ad, seeing "When Good Pets Go Bad III" on Fox and not being able to change back to PBS.

I'm obsessively checking his posts to read the replies and - ohmygod! - I'm replying, too.

I love it!

Fergus

P.S. No spite intended to Alfie here; it appears that he has a wonderfully thick skin anyway.

-- Fergus Hammond (fhammond@adobe.com), December 04, 2001.

Tony:

You are not halucinating, but Max is right. You should be deleting 80% of the responses to Alfie's posts if your rules dictate allowing only on-topic responses to on-topic posts. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but YOU have let Alfie's banal diatribes ruin this forum, IMO. So in that sense, I agree with Max, Alfie has won. Goodbye.

With all sincerity,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), December 04, 2001.

Deleting posts takes some work and time and I don't like doing it. I've never had to delete much. I never said I was against off-topic responses, just that I think it's screwy that most of the off-topic ones are attacks upon Alfie's on-topic ones.

To Alfie: Alfie, my friend, can you please be more succinct and a bit less "wordy" with your posts? Sometimes you tend to ramble, and that can be irritating to some. I think this would greatly reduce some people's anger toward you, and make my life a bit easier.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@mail.com), December 04, 2001.

Tony: You are not hallucinating. You just misunderstood my post. I never said ANYTHING about not liking Alfie's posts, nor have I EVER been critical of him in ANY way. In fact, I defended him a couple of weeks ago when a very unkind post was directed toward him. My post was simply an observation of human behavior. Only Alfie knows for sure whether he is sincere, or is only just having a little fun with us. If he is sincere, then he is not deserving of the criticism directed his way, for he, like a lot of us, is just trying to learn a little something about photography. If he is playing a game, then I still maintain. . . he is winning.

-- Max Wall (mtwall@earthlink.net), December 04, 2001.

Alfie Dearest, I've reviewed your posted work and have a suggestion for you. Stop trying to re-invent 20th century modern art and use your Leicas to photograph your wife nude. Or naked. Unless you chose horribly it might make for more interesting photographs to critique. And, if she is really delightful you may even get some rave reviews from some of the curmuegeons. When confronted by a beautiful body, well photographed some may even overlook the dust spots.............

Kirk

-- kirk r. tuck (kirktuck@kirktuck.com), December 04, 2001.

I did not look far enough back in the posts before sending my previous post. I have now reviewed "Sarah with Cat" and wish to withdraw my previous suggestion. Perhaps Weston-esque landscapes would suit you better. Perhaps with the 21mm Super Angulon for the R System. I can hardly wait.

Kirk

-- kirk r. tuck (kirktuck@kirktuck.com), December 04, 2001.

Alfie, they're all jealous. Secretly, each wants to scan and copy your "Picasso's Elephant" full-size, then frame it and hang it on the wall. Some night, if he's lucky, he'll meet some lady at a bar and invite her up to his apartment to see his "oversized Wang":) You'll be famous, just like Warhol or Rembrandt. Keep the snapshots coming.

-- Pat Dunsworth (pdunsworth@aryarch.com), December 04, 2001.

Kirk R. Tuck: your remarks are too sexist for my taste, objectifying Alfie's future bride. Your comments give us insight into your nature, far more than they say anything about the Princess. Grow up.

Alfie: You like both Vermeer and Andy Warhol? That's quite a range! I never learned to like Warhol, because he makes me feel that I'm being put on. Sort of like "the king is naked" in the story about the Emperor's New Clothes. I like Vermeer, though. Guess I'm fairly conservative?

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), December 04, 2001.

Any more questions? From: "Wang, Albert" Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 10:30 am Subject: RE: [NikonMF] Re: Why Nikkor?

Why Nikkor? Easy:

Because Nikkor users aren't as arrogant as most Leica users :)

Alfie

-- Joe Brugger (joebrugger@news.oregonian.com), December 05, 2001.

Any questions? From: "Wang, Albert" Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 10:30 am Subject: RE: [NikonMF] Re: Why Nikkor?

Why Nikkor? Easy:

Because Nikkor users aren't as arrogant as most Leica users :)

Alfie

-- Joe Brugger (joebrugger@news.oregonian.com), December 05, 2001.

We are not worthy! We are not worthy!

Alfie! You photos get over 300-400 views EACH, you posts rile up all types of malcontents (some of whom, uh, normally aren't seen or heard around here), while others painstakingly show us the remarkable statistics on your posts!

Whether you are "real" or not, you are a genius tho' you may not claim to know it. It's so nice to keep things here a little random, lest we revert to uberproper, well heeled, sexist chit chat.

As for your photo, I think it would've worked if it had been a little more square- just my taste. Also, it has a strange cast- daylight film under artificial light? There are filters... but you might have much better luck with B&W- I've been very pleased with the results of Kodak TCN400 at my local lab (in contrast- pun intended- to my experience with XP2 Super).

Some other thoughts- try sorting your photos into good, better, best (if you're an optimist- bad, worse, sucks, if not). And just try posting the ones you think are good.

Another idea for developing a discipline toward parsimony is to do a slide show. Unless you want to put your audience into deep, REM sleep, you'll have to limit yourself to maybe 50 or so, for a 1 hr show. I did a slide show of a recent trip to China- culling about 100 slides out of 700, for a 2 hr presentation (that included a brief intermission). Since it was mainly travel photog, I added some close up photos of maps to help guide the presentation. It went really well. People came up to me a year later still remarking on it (and this was pre-Leica for me...).

The reason I say this is that in your photo.net photos you have a number of images which are almost identical, to my eyes. I think you might benefit from furiously editing yourself to a nice, Hemingwayesque sparse photographic prose. Now, if you want to have multiple photos of the same scene, trying controlling what's different more tightly: try a composition with you subject on the left, in the middle, on the right, for instance. This way you can be a little surer of the effects of changing your composition.

My $0.02.

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), December 05, 2001.

Jack Flesher sez:

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but YOU [Tony R] have let Alfie's banal diatribes ruin this forum, IMO.

Uh, hello? Blaming Alfie for the less than ideal replies that his posts engender? A bit of a burden to place on him no?

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), December 05, 2001.

AL-FIE! AL-FIE! AL-FIE!

A genuine pop phenomenon, and in my own lifetime :-)

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), December 05, 2001.

We could decide to rename this forum and call it ALFIE-FORUM from now on ... Perhaps we are all in the process of an artproject now. When it is finished Alfie will let us know and we might all feel better then.

40 odd years ago CHRISTO was also misunderstood terribly when he started with his wrapping business. The problem is, most of us can´t wait for so long to see ALFRED WRONG in a museum. Or does photography stop time and keeps young?

Best wishes

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), December 05, 2001.

Note that "Alfie" has four of the five letters that spell "Leica"... [chills down back]...

-- john costo (mahler@lvcm.com), December 05, 2001.

How about him inaugurating his own forum which he can then entitle

Leifa

or at least change his address to

leifa_phile@hotmail.com

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), December 05, 2001.

ha ha, i am amused by it all. maximum guffawing value i must say. it's like sitting on top of the Swiss wall [neutral zone] and watching left to right the mud-slinging between Alfie troops and anti-Alfie supporters. (sounds like BBC News commentary about Alfiestan). Jokes aside:

1. The thought has crossed my mind (several times) that Alfie could be 'having a laugh', 'taking the mickey', 'pulling our chains', so to say. I hope he truly isn't as it is waisting a lot of people's energy and valuable time.

2. Alfie's photos: Photographic Style, is a subjective matter, which is why it is causing such divided opinion. Okay, it may not slot into many people's idea of a 'great image', but it is Alfie's personal style of photography. That is what art is. Some like it, others don't. I agree that technically they are not perfect, so room for improvement here.

3. Content: Like what Tony has kindly asked. Please edit what you have to ask/say succintly and to the point. I am often struck by the wall of writing you usually post. Too much fat. Lean it up please.

4. If Alfie is truly genuine, then..post away he should. A bit of entertainment provides equilibrium to the rest of the topics discussed.

Now, excuse me while I climb back up to Swiss territory. He He,

-- sparkie (sparkie@mailcity.com), December 05, 2001.

#1 is correct. He's exacting some sort of bizarre personal revenge on Leica users. Mr. W is posting to a Nikon list using a different e-mail address and behaving more or less reasonably.

-- Josef Brugger (jbrugger@pcez.com), December 05, 2001.

Alfie has got his own Yahoo forum and photo album over at Alfie Wang's Leica Photos
Seven photos there so far.

-- Fred Sun (redsky3@yahoo.com), December 09, 2001.