truls
Lifetime Member
Posts: 568
|
Post by truls on Jul 26, 2014 14:37:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Jul 26, 2014 15:26:31 GMT -5
WOW what can i say, this is just incredible stuff, thanks for the link truls !
|
|
SidW
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by SidW on Jul 26, 2014 20:51:07 GMT -5
Thanks, Truls.
A remarkable eye, a remarkable life, and several sad ends.
|
|
truls
Lifetime Member
Posts: 568
|
Post by truls on Jul 27, 2014 12:18:07 GMT -5
I saw the movie today, downloaded from where everybody knows, but I do not know. A very special story, the movie worth seeing.
How could a nanny afford a Rolleiflex, and how did she get all those perfect exposures?
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Jul 27, 2014 14:02:47 GMT -5
Interesting point of view on Vivian Mayers legacy by Ted Forbes:
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Jul 27, 2014 18:52:21 GMT -5
A fascinating woman and fascinating photos. I can't find it in cinema near me nor is it on DVD but I found a streaming video. A screen grab showing some of the thousands of undeveloped films and negatives.
|
|
SidW
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by SidW on Jul 28, 2014 8:03:03 GMT -5
... How could a nanny afford a Rolleiflex, and how did she get all those perfect exposures? ... They were presumably secondhand. Possibly, by the 1960s, the stuff brought back by servicemen was becoming available as it got traded in for newer imports. The perfect exposures? And the perfect composition and novel subject selection? She did have professional tuition from her mother's friend in the 1930s. Some of the pictures look as though they might have been commissioned, so she possibly had some income from her photography. If she'd been simply evicted, her belongings might have gone to the rubbish dump and never been heard of again. But she was sued for back rent, so they went to compulsory auction instead and were saved.
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Jul 28, 2014 11:47:14 GMT -5
I saw the movie today, downloaded from where everybody knows, but I do not know. A very special story, the movie worth seeing. How could a nanny afford a Rolleiflex, and how did she get all those perfect exposures? A nanny that does not spend whatever low wages she might receive on booze and entertainment and other abstractions and distractions could well save enough for a downpayment on a Rollei or a Leica or even a Hasselblad. And I for one am glad she did. Her point of view with the Rollei is unique these days and has resulted in many powerful and meaningful pictures. Mickey
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Jul 28, 2014 12:26:57 GMT -5
A lot of the quality and feel of the shots comes from using a TLR, they are generally considered to not be so intimidating to the subject, people react differently to a Reflex or Leica camera.
With the TLR you are not looking or staring at the subject,you are looking downwards. You are not hiding behind the camera but in open view, this gives a feeling of trust to the subject. These days people can be downright hostile to a 35mm camera of any type, but as they are unused to a TLR, you get a totally different response. I use my Meopta or a Rolliecord for street use for this reason.
She obviously had training in the use of the cameras, and took movies as well as the street shots. I saw the show in London, there were comments made about using photoshop style corrections by the current owner, but in the main the shots were printed as they were found. Normal darkroom dodges could have been used to extend contrast ranges and minimise burnout.
What is astonishing was her ability to pick the moment to take the shots. No record exists of what she did before a shot in terms of preparation, it seems she did none, and rarely repeated a shot.
Exposure accuracy comes with experience, and as to the camera cost, if you want it you usually find a way to afford it. She was in employment, and obviously could also afford the film costs etc.
Great Photographer, the near loss, and recovery was amazing.
Stephen.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Jul 28, 2014 19:17:48 GMT -5
Andy first brought Vivian Maier up on here a few years ago: HereStephen, the main reason why you get a different result is that you believe you will get a different result. If you are not at ease with an SLR but you are with a TLR for a portrait, say, then it's pretty obvious which will produce the better result for you.
|
|
SidW
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by SidW on Jul 28, 2014 19:41:16 GMT -5
A lot of the quality and feel of the shots comes from using a TLR, they are generally considered to not be so intimidating to the subject, people react differently to a Reflex or Leica camera ... You're probably correct, Stephen. I had the same experience when I always used the magnifier on the waist finder of an Exakta. No-one seemed to notice with head down. It's not so obvious what you're doing. Additionally, it's always true that if you can observe someone intentively (or a bird or animal) then they can also see at least one of your pupils, and this instinctively triggers an alert and a fight or flee reaction.
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Jul 29, 2014 4:18:58 GMT -5
A lot of the quality and feel of the shots comes from using a TLR, they are generally considered to not be so intimidating to the subject, people react differently to a Reflex or Leica camera ... You're probably correct, Stephen. I had the same experience when I always used the magnifier on the waist finder of an Exakta. No-one seemed to notice with head down. It's not so obvious what you're doing. Additionally, it's always true that if you can observe someone intentively (or a bird or animal) then they can also see at least one of your pupils, and this instinctively triggers an alert and a fight or flee reaction. One reason why I like my NEX5 is the flip-up screen, when I use it waist level like a TLR people tend to ignore me, it looks like I'm fiddling with the camera. Vivian Maier paid no rent or anything like that, she was housed, fed and looked after in her job and had a weekly wage. She could well afford a Rolleiflex or Leica which she seemed to have later on.
|
|