Perhaps this sounds flippant in light of the recent slamming going on. But the recent talk of Vermeer, Litchenstein and Warhol got me to thinking about the use of light and equipment.

Warhol was a polaroid man, no doubt. But Vermeer and Leica? Hasselblad perhaps? I remember a discussion between musicologists about whether Bach would have written for the piano had they been available in his time. Or more to the point: would he write for synthesizers if he were around today? They all agreed he would embrace them wholeheartedly. So, perhaps I've answered my own question.

My advance apologies for wasting anyone's time and yes I know there is a Philosophy of Photography forum here. But what the hell.

-- jeff voorhees (debonekou@yahoo.com), December 05, 2001

Answers

Quite possibly. The Dutch painters, of which Vermeer is one, invented the "candid" scene of everyday people and the "street scene". These are the Leica M's strenghts. Many great Dutch pictures have the character of classic Leica intimate shots. I understand that many of Vermeer is thought to have used the camera obscura in which case an R Leica or Hasselbad might be also considered Vermeer type cameras. However, in general his paintings give the impression of being a distinct "moment in time" of ordinary folk and hence resemble in spirit much M photography, even if he actually achieved this with much more planning and work than may appear from a first impression of his paintings.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), December 05, 2001.

Vermeer, I bet would go for a medium format camera. I think Degas would use Leica M's. Happy Day Scott

-- Scott (scottevans@mediaone.net), December 05, 2001.

Judging by the striking similarities of the use of light by Vermeer and Marie Cosindas, I would have to say the he'd probably use a Linhof Technika and Polaroid peel-apart film.

-- Wilhelm (bmitch@home.com), December 05, 2001.

Actually, for some years now David Hockney has been advancing a theory (his own) that the old masters used some sort of optical device (a camera obscura) to guide their painting, rather than painting freehand. Hockney just conducted a forum about this topic in New York. See this or this< /a>, for example. I saw Hockney's theory presented in the Hammer museum in L.A. and it is fascinating.

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

Personally, I would think that a 4 x 5 view camera is more appropriate to Vermeer's style?

Alfie

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 05, 2001.

For Vermeer - definitely a Rollei TLR - no mirror shake in those dark Flemish rooms. And as Scott said, for Leica M users definitely pick the Impressionists - the first 'street photographers'!

Lichenstein - a process camera - for the halftone screen.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), December 05, 2001.

Nah. With his attention to detail & meticulous technique, he would have used a Zeiss Ikon Contax II or III, if he bothered w/35mm. BTW, both Philip Steadman's "Vermeer's Camera" & David Hockney's "Secret Knowledge: Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters" discuss the Old Master's use of optics.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), December 05, 2001.

Vermeer and Frans Hals both might have used the Leica optics; a 50 or 35, perhaps. Anyway, Vermeer's "A View of Delft" brings to mind something one might see through the viewfinder of an M. My real guess, though, would be an 8x10 Deardorff. It would look right in place in 17th century Delft. John

-- John Myers (mymacv@aol.com), December 05, 2001.

But this begs the question. If a Leica photographer decides to try his hand at painting - does he use oil, acrylic or watercolor..........

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), December 05, 2001.

Bob-

I agree. Since this is pure subjectivity here, it would have to oil. I don't think acrylics or watercolors would give the look. He'd probably go digital anyway.

-- jeff voorhees (debontekou@yahoo.com), December 05, 2001.

Speaking of the masters, Leicas and painting, I've read that HCB spent much of his time painting. I've never heard of any of his work being published, but it would be fasinating to see, given the impact he's had on photojournalism and Art in general.

Another artist who brings to mind street photography is Eduard Manet, whom many consider the first Modern artist, perhaps because much of his work captured the street life of Paris of his day, which was quite a break from the style of that time. Like Degas (his contemporary and freind) much of his work focused on unorthodox views of everyday scenes populated by seemingly unposed subjects. IMO Degas and Manet introduced a refreshing sense of composition which still influences artists today. By the way, Vermeer rocks!

-- Pat Dunsworth (pdunsworth@aryarch.com), December 05, 2001.

"Vermeer and Frans Hals both might have used the Leica optics; a 50 or 35, perhaps."

Sometime in the '70s Pop. or Mod. Photo ran a piece on a reseacher/ photographer who went back to the locales of several Dutch Masters' landscapes and cityscapes and determined that the lens (35mm format) that most accurately reproduced their framing and perspective was a 105mm. His pictures more-or-less made his point, compared to the original paintings - certainly the perspective was 'short tele' in appearance.

Then he tried to claim that this proved the 105 was the only "true" normal lens. As with most such theories this faded away gracefully within a few years.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), December 05, 2001.

Oh...and Bob and Jeff - oils for Velvia, colored chalks for E100VS - and ochre and charcoal (discontinued original cave-painting pigments) for Kodachrome 25.

8^)

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), December 05, 2001.

Absolutely, definitely a Summicron. I enjoyed visiting the Vermeer exhibition at The Met in New York City earlier this year and was struck by the luminosity of his images....whoops...paintings. Most are low light shots without a tripod, so has to be a Leica M. Not sure what speed film, since there is virtually no grain (Photoshop, perhaps?) If you look closely at The Artist in his Studio you will see a gadget bag by the artist's right foot.

-- David Killick (Dalex@net.net.nz), December 06, 2001.

you guys crack me up.

-- john (jdbomes@hotmail.com), December 06, 2001.

Oh, if only Ektachrome 25 could return back to the market, we could have painting-like photographs again.

Alfie

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 06, 2001.

Pat, some of HCB's sketch portraits are in his book, Tete a Tete.

-- John (johnfleetwood@hotmail.com), December 06, 2001.

Ektachrome 25? Oh, dear...

-- g (gdgianni@aol.com), December 06, 2001.